honestly, i think personal attacks are part of the point of the show. the problem is when they use them to support an argument that is not factually correct. several episodes are political rather than factual and seem very hypocritical.
Penn Jilette is a self-admitted failure of an academic and even still he puts out more compelling arguments than you did. And fyi, a strawman is where you articulate the oppositions position in a way so that it os easily debunked. Actually having a spokesperson for the side that they are arguing against is the exact opposite of a strawman.
How does it feel to be stupider than a high school dropout?
Ok, you seems to be fond of accusing P&T of strawmen, but that is just what you do yourself. You make sweeping accusations and go to vicious attacks against their political views (and you said they made personal attacks).
Not to mention that you have changed the order of the episode to make it look like they are deliberately holding the scientific data.
And yes, water is a chemical, you can't wash out water since it is also in the structure of a vegetable, water can be said to cause extretions
funny how you use news clips to get your point across. usually enviromentolists and lefties say the news is deceptive, one sided, and even full of lies.
@emixolydian If the information is cited correctly, you can go to that citation and look at it instead. If it's not cited correctly, it's not credible info. Wikipedia is often a good source for the casual information seeker, but it is not a credible source to cite when making an argument. Primary sources are always better.
YES, IT DOES MEAN THAT THERE HAS TO BE DEBATE ABOUT GRAVITY AND EVOLUTION. Did you know that Einstein never got a Nobel prize for his (incredibly important) revelations about gravity? This is because there was a lot of debate as to whether it was true. In the end, he came out on top. Debate is a tool by which we can assess the validity of ideas. If something is immune to debate, how can we know whether it's a good idea? You sound like environmentalism is your religion.
I respect what you're trying to do here, but you're going about it all wrong. You have to realize that P&T:BS is an entertainment program and that P&T are COMEDIANS. You point out places where they are being illogical - missing the fact that it was A JOKE. E.g. the part where they point out how nice the air in D.C. is.
They spend the entire time emphasizing that RAN *chose* this woman as their spokesperson and you call her a "random girl."
What a illogical zero this guy is! Where is your proof ?!
The BBC is not proof, they too voice the words of ignorant morons that knit pick a single problem. The water has improved on most of the lakes and rivers. We have fucking ugly fish back in our canal that were "extinct" for 35 years.
Yes water is in your vegetables! Water is in every organism you fucking moron! So it doesn't wash out! You are a brainless twat!
What a illogical zero this guy is! Where is your proof ?!
The BBC is not proof, they too voice the words of ignorant morons that knit pick a single problem. The water has improved on most of the lakes and rivers. We have fucking ugly fish back in our canal that were "extinct" for 35 years.
The idea of Bullshit was never to try to be scientific, their whole goal was mainly to be entertaining making fun of wackos. And, if you've ever spent 5 minutes with the 'bumper sticker' crowd (right or left, matters not) you know how incredibly misguided, alarmist, and naive they are. This episode was spot fucking on, and you're pissed because they got it so right. Fanaticism takes many retarded forms these days, this is one of them.
See here is the problem. Penn & Teller has done no actuall reaserch. They have simply listened to invorementalis idiots from the United states, instead of asking anyone from a serious scientific institute.
@AmericaJustin a better question where were there not facts? he tries to "debunk" them on subjective matters. just because they state things that are opposite to your belief dosent mean their wrong.
This shit is laughable, you're as biased as they are, don't you realize? Except you took out key things about the introductions so it would seem like what you're presenting is true.
I'm sorry, but lame effort. Next time do some research so you can really debunk their bullshit.
BOTH SIDES OF A DEBATE!!! Also, the idea behind going around asking for signatures to ban water was to prove the method of environmental hysteria. The idea that if we tell people about the harmful effects of something they don't really know anything about (dihydrogen monoxide - how many of refer to water as that everyday?) that they will passionately sign up for anything. It is all about learning your facts. Stop hating and start having an open mind.
So you looked up bottom line in the dictionary, oohhhh scary. You questioned who these "random" people are. It seems to me like you think they place the elderly folks there. And how condescending of you to argue that they don't know what they are talking about. Ok, so there are places that are suffering, we all know that. What Penn and Teller and trying to tell us is to put critical thinking behind everything we hear. Every episode is aimed at seeing both sides of a debate.
Haha you fail. There IS still debate about exactly how gravity functions in a physical sense and the mechanism of evolution is always being updated and debated. You could "debunk" any documentary using the stop and interject with unabated opinion the way you do here. Facts next time man.
Why would you take a show called Bullshit seriously? The show wasn't even denying the global warming belief, it was simply showing that some people don't research enough and put passion before reason and logic.
Your video is bullshit global warming is bullshit you just got insulted by watching penn and teller's show that you had to make your' own shitty video to complain about another video
Oh, and should be debate about gravity? Gravity is a law, one that, were a debate to be raised, would be incredibly easy to prove. If anyone wants to debate it, they can feel free to, but all it takes is the dropping of a single object to prove it's reality. Contentious topics such as global warming or creationism? They require debate, and typically, when actual science is thrown in? They are revealed to be no more than sensationalism and misinformation. You, sir,are a failure
From word one, you utterly fail. They do not talk to a 'random girl' they talk to a selected RAN representative, who was chosen to be their voice for the cause. Do yourself a favour, don't fall into the sensationalist nonsense, and actually do a bit of genuine digging. For all of the weaker points used for comedy, Penn and Teller have some fantastic figureheads of both sides on to talk. Your video has nothing but your voice, littered with spite and ignorance
Uh hey idiot :), Penn and Teller admit that they're not very scientific dozens of times. Their show is opinionated and comes from their side of the argument. It represents their personal viewpoint and showcases anecdotal evidence to back it up. FYI, by showing news reports and examples, rather than journals compiled using the scientific process, you're doing to same thing.
And why are you against capitalism? 7 billion people would still tax the planet no matter what society we had.
I started to break apart this video but there is to many problems with guy and his attempt to break apart P and T,s arguments from the show that it would take a whole page or 2 to attempt to list and explain all of them so ill just post the beginning "They" are not scientist and that is P and T,s point "They" are loud mouth misguided environmentalist you see on the news and hear on the radio telling people that the world is in peril despite any evidence to the contrary
ok you never watched the show judging by your comments on the B.S. show intro in, their episode on global warming at the end they didn’t deny its existence, in recycling they said to recycle all the aluminum and tin cans you want it actually helps, in gun control they spoke out against banning guns and supported background checks if you are going to accuse them of misrepresenting the facts don’t do the same that makes you a hypocrite and weakens your augment
This episode was in fact Bullshit. P and T did not offer any scientific data to back their contrarian arguments, they only resorted to misleading petitions, ad hominem attacks and general logical fallacies. This video does a good job of pointing out most of these, but there is so much to say on the topic. To all of those that like this episode, consider this: Why don't P&T interview a single environmental scientist- BECAUSE P&T DON'T HAVE SCIENCE ON THEIR SIDE, they are arguing against it
@muetter No...of course P and T had no evidence. They didn't bolster ethos by presenting prominent figures in the Environmental Sciences or promote a healthy degree of sketicism.
The entire episode was totally meant to debunk global warming and not environmental hysteria /sarcasm
You idiot! There is debate about Gravity and Evolution. We all tend to think gravity is pulling us down Einstein said gravity pushes us. Just recently physicist Dr. Erik Verlinde postulated that Gravity may not even exist the way we think about it. And evolution is always being debated by those that believe in creationism.
Why does anyone care about climate change anyway? We are all going to be dead because of the hole in the ozone layer anyway that was never fixed. Unless of course the environmentalist where lying about the hole in the ozone layer, if they weren't lying then why don't they still go on about it.
I commented nicely on one of your other videos... now I feel necessary to let you know you're a dirty hippie. It's not the 60s anymore. The moral majority thinks you need to get a job and take a bath. You're pissed because someone disagrees with you. You don't have any arguments, you just want to impress hippie women so they'll possibly suck your pathetic d#$%
Sorry, epic fail. You present NO facts to debunk them. You are voicing a lot of opinion with nothing to back it up. Please, learn the art of debate before stepping in the ring.
@TheThunderduck No facts? Better blame Penn and Teller for overusing cheap rhetoric, it is they who abstain from giving out any decent fact. Penn and Teller make the mistake to confuse these enviromentalists with their argument, they obviously look down upon these 'hippy' activists and conclude that their argument must be void of substance as well.
I used to enjoy penn and teller on various other topics, but this is very dissappointing.
@TheHardProblem sorry but hippies really arent intelligent so its hard to "look up" at them. hippies are more content to walk in the grass and sing and dance. they arent interested in intellectual pursuits. thats fine, but it also causes you to lose credibility when talking about intellectually driven topics. global climate change is a scientific issue, not an issue of morality. i like the hippies when they protested something that was real and clear, and that was war.
@Cheapshot420420 Not an issue of morality, are you serious? What do you think does drive these sciences in the first place? It's not just for the fun of it I can tell you that much. And also, I guess you've got another problem on your hands cause I find the enviromental crisis to be very much real and clear an issue of importance as anything can be. Try to think of your own and children's future, and not just 3 generations ahead.
@TheThunderduck Obviously you didn't watch the whole thing or comprehend any of it. At 3:23, and at 5:00 he presents what are called... yeah, you guessed it, facts. Facts that debunk the stance that Penn and Teller are spinning. Putting the word "no" in capital letters just makes you look more desperate. Sorry, you're the failure here. Try to acknowledge an opposing stance before you put your foot in your mouth and act like you're a debating guru when you're just an idiot.
@corpsmanup87 - with respect, those are good points but I would personally characterize those as "Libertarian" ideas before I would as "left". I don't have a lot of time for this, but for example, consider that Pat Robertson, hardly a leftist, just came out in favor of legalizing marijuana.
you know that you've been taught all wrong. right? your not saving the planet. your saving your way of life. cars, houses, computers, ect. the planet has been around for billions of years. gone threw millions of changes. it was a ball of ice, not a ice age, but a big ball of ice. so get off your high horse and started telling us what your really trying to save. SAVE OUR TV'S........SAVE OUR INTERNET......SAVE OUR STARBUCKS
Random girl? Dude, YOU are a random person posting videos (bad ones) on a video posting website full of random people posting random videos, so by your logic, no one should give a crap what you say. (Not that anyone does.) Work on your debating skills dude. Oh and please grab a dictionary and look up the word debunk. Thanks
your editing really sucks balls. in fact so do your arguments. normally i dont resort to insults but man, youre not even worth attempting to argue with intelligently. you really, really, really suck at doing rebuttal videos. i suggest you check out howtheworldworks on here. thats how you do a rebuttal.
There is much debate about Gravity and Evolution. Please try to do at least a little research before making these videos. Oh, and there is water to keep far more people alive than there is food (almost a billion more), and these people that you are defending are against any means of producing more food. You also cut to clips that are as random as the people Penn talks to (if not more considering journalists have less credentials than Bullshit's research team and the scientists they interview.
craziest part of your sht is that they aren't against evironmentalism! Their issue is that there are too many of you hyper activists that don't actually listen to the facts as you point to in your episode. "soooo whaaaaat"? HE WAS A FREAKIN' FOUNDER!!! and he saw where it was going!!!!!!! come on dude. Insert as you feel, no one believes ecology is not an area that needs to be adressed, but sensationalism is ridiculous on any side and should not be the factor to gain support!
Nice try, but you're not quite hitting the mark. All the other arguments about and against your information are correct. I don't like the fact that they have to try to insult you or belittle you for THINKING. That makes them look just plain stupid. So keep questioning everything. And you really did leave out the data that P & T referenced in the program.
Those freshman classes have really expanded your horizons. You really need to look at sampling parameters etc...before you start screaming no sciece. Because there is no sciece in environmental hysteria, just anal-retentive Liberal politics. You twit.
I apparently misunderstand the meaning of the term "debunked". I thought it was to provide evidence to show that something is wrong or false. Please explain what you mean by "debunked", because I saw nothing of the sort. I had to read "The Skeptical Environmentalist" back in college a few years ago; this book has all the evidence you need to draw your own conclusions, which happens to be the same evidence that is used by environmentalist proponents to "prove" that we are in bad shape.
@sscitan P.S. Your whole video made me facepalm, but the one part that really shows that you lack the ability to pay attention (or didn't care enough to) is the part where you claim that P&T are unable/didn't respond to the environmentalist claim that global warming is occuring at an alarming rate. If you see the segment from the gentleman from the CATO Institution, he says that our average temperature has increased by 1 degree in 100 years, and that this trend isn't enough to be alarmed.
These guys are right wing cheerleaders. Where are the Bullshit episodes on Islam as practiced by Obama, or the Foreign birth of Obama? Where's the episode on The Existence of Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq? Where are the episodes on Tea Party Hysteria or "Mission Accomplished"? It's the pot calling the kettle black.
@jarmbru Actually, you are retarded. they are hardcore libertarian. The show is menat for comedy, not to point out all of the shit we already know about.
And for anyone who believes that humans are causing catastrophic global warming, 31,000 scientists, 9,000 of which have Ph D's, signed a petition stating that global warming is not true. Are any of us that have responded to this video smart enough to say that all of them are wrong? I doubt it. Although I'm certain there are plenty of people who are arrogant enough.
Kate wasn't a "random girl." The Rainforest Action Network chose her to be their spokesperson. You're a moron and it's obvious that you didn't actually pay attention to what was going on or being said. Fail
This debunks NOTHING not one single item was "debunked", and the wikipedia you show was nothing more than slander and even evidence of green-peace's anti-corporate agenda.
i almost finished it, 2 minutes away. all hes doing here is stroking his and his friend's eco hard-ons and doesn't even make a formal argument, im waiting for the carbon taxes to cause a depression maybe most of the middle class social and psychological bubbles will be popped and wake these hippie posers rethink themselves and their views when they see anything out of the ordinary
Wow...so in response to what you label as misleading vividness (a false accusation on your part by the way) you engage in...misleading vividness. One village in China is no more a representative sample than one day in Washington. I see no reason to even listen to any more of your garbage.
As to why the accusation of misleading vividness was erroneous on your part:
There is no underlying claim that a beautiful day proves there is not a problem with pollution.
Let's just get something straight. Straw men, poisoned wells, misleading vividness, and personal attacks are not fallacies. They are at worst underhanded ethos arguments. To be perfectly honest you're also guilty of most of the "fallacies" you call Penn & Teller out on.
Clearly you support environmentalism and I can respect that. But I do disagree with the modern movement. I support responsible development, not a halt of progress.
Anyone who quotes their references for the purposes of scientific knowledge is an idiot. Tried to watch all three parts, but could not take the helium-voiced, trite interjections of the director. Poorly produced and equally ineffective in convincing me against the views of "Bullshit".
There are as many (if not more) holes in this guy's 'debunking' as there are in this specific episode of Penn & Teller's BS. But at least with Penn & Teller's BS, I was entertained.
No science whatsoever. I don't like the drum beating self righteous "hippies"(so called) either, but that doesn't mean that the entire scientific community is dead wrong. Climate change is a fact and anyone who says otherwise has not done their research.(and I mean scientific journal research)
Hey, thanks for making this video. I love Penn and Teller and they are usually quite rational, if not biased, in their shows. But I was dismayed at the huge amount of Bullshit in this one.
No science whatsoever. I don't like the drum beating self righteous "hippies"(so called) either, but that doesn't mean that the entire scientific community is dead wrong. Climate change is a fact and anyone who says otherwise has not done their research.(and I mean scientific journal research)
@CanadianRunner Yeah this one kind of destroyed their credibility to me. If there's one thing I'm certain of, it's global warming/climate change, and it's clear that they never really worked in a way to actually uncover the "truth". They knew what they wanted to hear from the start. It's easy to debunk ESP, talking to the dead, etc. But in this one they let their political (libertarian, CATO fellows) views get in the way of their objectivity.
Thanks for the debunking. When I watched this episode I was pretty disappointed in Penn and Teller because I knew that most of what they said was "bullshit." Now it's hard for me to take them seriously on other stuff. Good to see someone took the time to debunk it.
Oh, and other people... if you actually read the description/watch for more than 30 seconds you'll know that the author is actually debunking the supposed debunking, so yeah...
@Kain5th You clearly have no other argument. Wikipedia is kind of sketchy, but it's actually pretty good at simply saying things and being quick and easy to find. In the end I have read enough in my research for school that was not from wikipedia to know that in this case wikipedia was more or less right.
Hey guys let's point out logical fallacies on a show where they openly said they were biased. Maybe the little smartass here was too busy with his own strawman's arguments to see the big picture.
@HowAboutSomeTruth1 That's good, their tactics are quite bad. Usually they are right (like against ESP, talking to dead, etc.) but this time they are horribly wrong. It's a shame that they can be so condescending towards a view when they are obviously the ones full of shit.
Random girl? The person the organization chose to be it's spokesperson for a nationally broadcast TV show is a "random girl"? Whats funny is how much time they spent driving that point home, and you still reduce her to a "random girl"
@gramamge33 The point is that she's just clearly not good for TV. She's stumbling the whole time, not because she necessarily has no knowledge, but because she's nervous. Also, why do they talk to a nervous college kid and not an actual scientist? The only really reputable climate change advocate they talked to was Ross Gelbspan, and they talked over him and called him an "asshole."
I love how Youtube has the words 'Most disliked in red text, in the description. This zitfaced little shit makes this video, speaking super quietly because Mommy is sleeping in the next room, and basically proves nothing. Not a fucking thing. What about the creator of the Weather Channel and the 30,000 other science experts that filed a lawsuit against Al Gore?? Global warming & environmental hysteria are bullshit. Please go back to the mall and order an Orange Julius. Oh, and please fuck off.
@DevSodDribble I have heard that, but upon googling it (the 30000 scientists) I found not one reputable source. Show me a reputable article that states this, like from BBC, CNN, some kind of actual news network. Until then I have to assume someone dreamed it up.
@DevSodDribble That's Fox News, which isn't a reputable source really. And the lawsuit hasn't been filed yet (look it up. There's not a single mainstream news source for this other than this Fox News vid). Also the 30000 figure is questionable at best. Polling of scientists shows that they overwhelmingly support the anthropogenic climate change hypothesis. Wiki is not perfect, but this is well sourced (wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change).
hahaha directedchaos you used the exact same point they used to try and prove them wrong. after they said a nice day in D.C. and then you said yea that's one day in one place. which is a good point. however, you go on and use one day in one place to say the world is polluted. and yes there should always be debate. because just 50 some years ago scientists were POSITIVE that atoms were the smallest things in the world. now we know of electrons protons and neutrons.
@hailmary7283 Dudes not making a well-funded documentary here... there's a lot of evidence for what he said, but he's a random dude on youtube. Don't expect full-length documentary quality for a youtube movie.
@YUHaiwing my point was that he did a terrible job. And i was pointing out that his criticisms were often times hypocriticale. even for youtube this was terrible.
@hailmary7283 I don't think so. Firstly, I think his point was not so much that the debate was over: It's that when the vast majority of scientists have consensus on an issue, it's no longer time for "debate" but action. There's no time for more "debate" on a serious issue of this kind.
Also, I mean you have never seen water/air pollution things on the news? He just used one example because it's obvious that there is a lot of bad air and water. You don't need to beat that horse for long.
@YUHaiwing2 yea but saying i see bad air on the news is just the same as saying i see nice air outside. and i don't deny there isn't pollution there is and we should cut down on it. but when you compare global warming to Gravity and evolution. you are trying to say the debate is over.
@hailmary7283 There's still "debate" about evolution too. Gravity isn't really debated, other than the intricate details of it in physics circles. Things should be debated, but when facing such scientific consensus there should really be action taken... debate is good, but when the fate of the world rests on the timeliness and strength of your decisions, it's wise to act fast, with the direction from experts. The "debate" isn't over, but at this point we've got to take action as if it is.
@YUHaiwing no i agree about there being debate about evolution. but whenever someone wants to say that the debate is over they typically (almost always in fact) point to evolution and gravity.
Sorry dude... but P&T kinda stuck a stake through your asses on this one. Your counterpoints are just plain ridiculous. P&T simply asked you to stop using the environment as a facade and just come out in the open and admit that your real agenda is political not scientific. They just asked you to be honest. They even admitted that they think there are good arguments for socialism. You are the frauds here... pretending to be scientists instead of political activists.
this debunking is bullshit.P&T make good points the environmental moement has no structure,most of the people who are put/nominated in as "leaders" have very few credentials.I am an environmentalist but i wouldnt associate with these lumpheads.There heart is in the right place but they need to wake up
Water is a chemical. (Every molecular structure is.) And she didn't say it was "new," she said it's "being used now." (If I say I'm sitting in a chair "now," that doesn't mean I think chairs are new.) The whole point of the H2O experiment was to see if people would sign something without knowing anything about it. And they proved their point.
I always wish they would go further with experiments like that, and get larger samples. They make some good points, but it's hard to draw conclusions on a hand-full of people.
Just because at some place in the world some people dont have acess to water and just because some places in the world people dont have acess to fresh air and finally yes our water is not worse today even our worst food and water currently gotten from places like USA and Europe is better than we have had in the past our worst discount products and other water is the best humans have ever had till now.
1)penn meant that no enviroment catastrophe had happen even though many scientest belived it was going to happen.
2)they never claimed that the air in gergyo wasnt polluted.
3)because socialism is bad for the enviroment.
4)they use the same missleading tactics as enviromentalist groups to get ppl to try to ban something they really dont know anything about. everything is a chemical(thats basic knowledge). u dont seem to listen to what they are saying.
U trash Patrick Moore but he didn´t leave Greenpeace because he is was offered a job as a lobbist, he leaved because he thought the were to extremist, part of this has to do when the Berlin wall went down and a lot of communist joined the enviromental movement.
I hope that u r not one of those assholes that say that mankind is the "cancer" of the planet
I believe we definitely have environmental problems. I think they are just trying to prove as I have also exeperienced working as an environmental canvasser that most people in the environmental movement are uninformed middle class people who participate to feel good and believe sensationalism works better than scientific data. So they did not need any. The show wasn't Global Warming or Water Pollution is Bullshit. Just the fanaticism behind these problems
I get that you might disagree with P&Ts points of view, but you are not proving anything with this 10 minute waste of time. All you did was hiding some the points presented in the show to make them less credible and ridicule the few remaining points.
Its okay to be skeptic about their shows (as they are skeptics themselves), but I'm sure you would be able to come up with something much better if you worked a lot harder on it.
@StrongmanTaylor How so? Is it because he does not agree with your views? Sorry man, I'm gonna have to side with directedChaos here. He made some good arguments, while they best you could do was right an empty personal attack and use an internet cliche, a good one I will admit, but a cliche nonetheless. In short, you sir are the one who is FAIL.
The language that they use is somewhat tricky, but it is reasonable. While they don't prove that these people have been drawn in to what they are doing by similar language, they have shown that it is at least plausible.
Straw men are not always fallacious if they are used in a part of a larger argument. Refuting or discrediting a weaker version of an argument is legitimate if the complete argument is addressed at some point.
@Knonsense981 I don't think it's reasonable. It's clearly a leading question. Moreover, it proves absolutely nothing. So some hippies at a hippie convention signed a petition, who cares. It's a bad way to supposedly debunk environmental science.
I think the biggest issue is they have a pretty strong political leaning and probably went into this without the possibility of changing their minds, which is very unscientific. The news clips did a pretty good job of pointing out just how many problems there are in the world.
Contrarily I do think the dihydrogen monoxide bit was legitimate. It showed that promoting fear was an effective way to get signatures without the people signing even thinking twice. I wonder how many didn't sign though.
honestly, i think personal attacks are part of the point of the show. the problem is when they use them to support an argument that is not factually correct. several episodes are political rather than factual and seem very hypocritical.
neomp5 1 month ago
You sir, are an idiot.
IronCrossOz 1 month ago
Penn Jilette is a self-admitted failure of an academic and even still he puts out more compelling arguments than you did. And fyi, a strawman is where you articulate the oppositions position in a way so that it os easily debunked. Actually having a spokesperson for the side that they are arguing against is the exact opposite of a strawman.
How does it feel to be stupider than a high school dropout?
topster888 2 months ago
Aaaand of course, the holy cow of the enviromental movement, the ban on DDT. A ban that cost millions of people's lives in malaria. Feeling proud?
She actually did not lie, but since you are biased as all hell and want to read in things, of course you are going to find something.
And again, of course water is a chemical, fail chemistry much?
What they were proving is that with the right set of voice and the right words, you can convince otherwise intelligent people of almost anything.
Blargaha 2 months ago
Ok, you seems to be fond of accusing P&T of strawmen, but that is just what you do yourself. You make sweeping accusations and go to vicious attacks against their political views (and you said they made personal attacks).
Not to mention that you have changed the order of the episode to make it look like they are deliberately holding the scientific data.
And yes, water is a chemical, you can't wash out water since it is also in the structure of a vegetable, water can be said to cause extretions
Blargaha 2 months ago
Comment removed
Patsfan5654 3 months ago
i don't take anyone who uses windows movie maker seriously.
greenragdoll666 3 months ago
funny how you use news clips to get your point across. usually enviromentolists and lefties say the news is deceptive, one sided, and even full of lies.
Deerhuntermike125 3 months ago
Also, wikipedia is not a credible source.
Thanks for playing, I'm less than four minutes in and I already think you're an idiot.
DontMockMySmock 4 months ago
@DontMockMySmock How is wikipedia not a credible source? Every claim is cited and the source is listed at the bottom of the page..
emixolydian 4 months ago
@emixolydian If the information is cited correctly, you can go to that citation and look at it instead. If it's not cited correctly, it's not credible info. Wikipedia is often a good source for the casual information seeker, but it is not a credible source to cite when making an argument. Primary sources are always better.
DontMockMySmock 4 months ago
OH GOD.
YES, IT DOES MEAN THAT THERE HAS TO BE DEBATE ABOUT GRAVITY AND EVOLUTION. Did you know that Einstein never got a Nobel prize for his (incredibly important) revelations about gravity? This is because there was a lot of debate as to whether it was true. In the end, he came out on top. Debate is a tool by which we can assess the validity of ideas. If something is immune to debate, how can we know whether it's a good idea? You sound like environmentalism is your religion.
DontMockMySmock 4 months ago
I respect what you're trying to do here, but you're going about it all wrong. You have to realize that P&T:BS is an entertainment program and that P&T are COMEDIANS. You point out places where they are being illogical - missing the fact that it was A JOKE. E.g. the part where they point out how nice the air in D.C. is.
They spend the entire time emphasizing that RAN *chose* this woman as their spokesperson and you call her a "random girl."
I could go on, but it's painful to watch.
DontMockMySmock 4 months ago
What a illogical zero this guy is! Where is your proof ?!
The BBC is not proof, they too voice the words of ignorant morons that knit pick a single problem. The water has improved on most of the lakes and rivers. We have fucking ugly fish back in our canal that were "extinct" for 35 years.
Yes water is in your vegetables! Water is in every organism you fucking moron! So it doesn't wash out! You are a brainless twat!
rdoetjes 4 months ago
What a illogical zero this guy is! Where is your proof ?!
The BBC is not proof, they too voice the words of ignorant morons that knit pick a single problem. The water has improved on most of the lakes and rivers. We have fucking ugly fish back in our canal that were "extinct" for 35 years.
rdoetjes 4 months ago
What a illogical zero this guy is! Where is your proof ?!
rdoetjes 4 months ago
the quality on the video is crap
iarebrown 5 months ago
Look at all of these libertarian fanboys shitting on your critique of their favorite shock entertainment show. Hah. Good job.
EucharistOfHypnos 5 months ago
You debunked nothing, zero, zip, nada....
miamivice966 5 months ago
You fuckwad ! you can do better than this. Thats why the Green movement is losing ground in this war to save the earth.
zenmachine2 5 months ago
The idea of Bullshit was never to try to be scientific, their whole goal was mainly to be entertaining making fun of wackos. And, if you've ever spent 5 minutes with the 'bumper sticker' crowd (right or left, matters not) you know how incredibly misguided, alarmist, and naive they are. This episode was spot fucking on, and you're pissed because they got it so right. Fanaticism takes many retarded forms these days, this is one of them.
LlamaTheory 5 months ago
you sound like a dick
not even trolling
lancekatre 7 months ago
See here is the problem. Penn & Teller has done no actuall reaserch. They have simply listened to invorementalis idiots from the United states, instead of asking anyone from a serious scientific institute.
gulbirk 8 months ago
they dont just lie on that show kid. they auctually stick to facts. your honestly retarded.
cole3454657 8 months ago
@cole3454657
Where were facts?
AmericaJustin 7 months ago
@AmericaJustin a better question where were there not facts? he tries to "debunk" them on subjective matters. just because they state things that are opposite to your belief dosent mean their wrong.
cole3454657 7 months ago
This shit is laughable, you're as biased as they are, don't you realize? Except you took out key things about the introductions so it would seem like what you're presenting is true.
I'm sorry, but lame effort. Next time do some research so you can really debunk their bullshit.
Cheers.
contrabassoon 9 months ago
why so many dislikes? does this have a scary zombie face pop up in it?? oh fuck oh fuck
TheMichiganStatement 9 months ago
Dude, you're so retarded it's laughable....laughable
joeob0216 10 months ago
BOTH SIDES OF A DEBATE!!! Also, the idea behind going around asking for signatures to ban water was to prove the method of environmental hysteria. The idea that if we tell people about the harmful effects of something they don't really know anything about (dihydrogen monoxide - how many of refer to water as that everyday?) that they will passionately sign up for anything. It is all about learning your facts. Stop hating and start having an open mind.
Formaniac13 10 months ago
So you looked up bottom line in the dictionary, oohhhh scary. You questioned who these "random" people are. It seems to me like you think they place the elderly folks there. And how condescending of you to argue that they don't know what they are talking about. Ok, so there are places that are suffering, we all know that. What Penn and Teller and trying to tell us is to put critical thinking behind everything we hear. Every episode is aimed at seeing both sides of a debate.
Formaniac13 10 months ago
Haha you fail. There IS still debate about exactly how gravity functions in a physical sense and the mechanism of evolution is always being updated and debated. You could "debunk" any documentary using the stop and interject with unabated opinion the way you do here. Facts next time man.
AlexClinkenbeard 10 months ago
Why would you take a show called Bullshit seriously? The show wasn't even denying the global warming belief, it was simply showing that some people don't research enough and put passion before reason and logic.
warnut8 10 months ago
Your video is bullshit global warming is bullshit you just got insulted by watching penn and teller's show that you had to make your' own shitty video to complain about another video
warnut8 10 months ago
Oh, and should be debate about gravity? Gravity is a law, one that, were a debate to be raised, would be incredibly easy to prove. If anyone wants to debate it, they can feel free to, but all it takes is the dropping of a single object to prove it's reality. Contentious topics such as global warming or creationism? They require debate, and typically, when actual science is thrown in? They are revealed to be no more than sensationalism and misinformation. You, sir,are a failure
RooCHToTB 11 months ago
From word one, you utterly fail. They do not talk to a 'random girl' they talk to a selected RAN representative, who was chosen to be their voice for the cause. Do yourself a favour, don't fall into the sensationalist nonsense, and actually do a bit of genuine digging. For all of the weaker points used for comedy, Penn and Teller have some fantastic figureheads of both sides on to talk. Your video has nothing but your voice, littered with spite and ignorance
RooCHToTB 11 months ago
lamest video ever...
mmddkk 1 year ago
Uh hey idiot :), Penn and Teller admit that they're not very scientific dozens of times. Their show is opinionated and comes from their side of the argument. It represents their personal viewpoint and showcases anecdotal evidence to back it up. FYI, by showing news reports and examples, rather than journals compiled using the scientific process, you're doing to same thing.
And why are you against capitalism? 7 billion people would still tax the planet no matter what society we had.
nateman742 1 year ago
Sad how these videos ultimately have the opposite effect of what your shooting for, lol.
EthanNin0 1 year ago
you know, the one at fault in the dihydrogen monoxide ban is the person being tricked, not the person pulling the trick.
viperxraptor2001 1 year ago
I started to break apart this video but there is to many problems with guy and his attempt to break apart P and T,s arguments from the show that it would take a whole page or 2 to attempt to list and explain all of them so ill just post the beginning "They" are not scientist and that is P and T,s point "They" are loud mouth misguided environmentalist you see on the news and hear on the radio telling people that the world is in peril despite any evidence to the contrary
drakonloki 1 year ago
ok you never watched the show judging by your comments on the B.S. show intro in, their episode on global warming at the end they didn’t deny its existence, in recycling they said to recycle all the aluminum and tin cans you want it actually helps, in gun control they spoke out against banning guns and supported background checks if you are going to accuse them of misrepresenting the facts don’t do the same that makes you a hypocrite and weakens your augment
drakonloki 1 year ago
You have no argument. You've wasted my time on Bulls**T!!
MrBSylvester 1 year ago
If anyone would like a more thorough fisking of this episode, check out this website
google search "logical science bullshit debunked" and click the first search result
muetter 1 year ago
This episode was in fact Bullshit. P and T did not offer any scientific data to back their contrarian arguments, they only resorted to misleading petitions, ad hominem attacks and general logical fallacies. This video does a good job of pointing out most of these, but there is so much to say on the topic. To all of those that like this episode, consider this: Why don't P&T interview a single environmental scientist- BECAUSE P&T DON'T HAVE SCIENCE ON THEIR SIDE, they are arguing against it
muetter 1 year ago
@muetter No...of course P and T had no evidence. They didn't bolster ethos by presenting prominent figures in the Environmental Sciences or promote a healthy degree of sketicism.
The entire episode was totally meant to debunk global warming and not environmental hysteria /sarcasm
GodofFlame101 1 year ago
Epic Fail. I award you no points, and my God have mercy on your soul.
JimofAustin1 1 year ago 2
You idiot! There is debate about Gravity and Evolution. We all tend to think gravity is pulling us down Einstein said gravity pushes us. Just recently physicist Dr. Erik Verlinde postulated that Gravity may not even exist the way we think about it. And evolution is always being debated by those that believe in creationism.
zerotowatch 1 year ago
Penn Teller are the best.
quadcatfly 1 year ago
Why does anyone care about climate change anyway? We are all going to be dead because of the hole in the ozone layer anyway that was never fixed. Unless of course the environmentalist where lying about the hole in the ozone layer, if they weren't lying then why don't they still go on about it.
Ray39UK 1 year ago
69 people were tied to a chair, tortured, and forced to believe in absolute crap
alexbc7493 1 year ago
I commented nicely on one of your other videos... now I feel necessary to let you know you're a dirty hippie. It's not the 60s anymore. The moral majority thinks you need to get a job and take a bath. You're pissed because someone disagrees with you. You don't have any arguments, you just want to impress hippie women so they'll possibly suck your pathetic d#$%
rabidrabbott 1 year ago
Penn & Teller rock! They should form a political party!
RobTheTutor 1 year ago
Sorry, epic fail. You present NO facts to debunk them. You are voicing a lot of opinion with nothing to back it up. Please, learn the art of debate before stepping in the ring.
TheThunderduck 1 year ago 30
@TheThunderduck No facts? Better blame Penn and Teller for overusing cheap rhetoric, it is they who abstain from giving out any decent fact. Penn and Teller make the mistake to confuse these enviromentalists with their argument, they obviously look down upon these 'hippy' activists and conclude that their argument must be void of substance as well.
I used to enjoy penn and teller on various other topics, but this is very dissappointing.
TheHardProblem 1 year ago
@TheHardProblem sorry but hippies really arent intelligent so its hard to "look up" at them. hippies are more content to walk in the grass and sing and dance. they arent interested in intellectual pursuits. thats fine, but it also causes you to lose credibility when talking about intellectually driven topics. global climate change is a scientific issue, not an issue of morality. i like the hippies when they protested something that was real and clear, and that was war.
Cheapshot420420 10 months ago
@Cheapshot420420 Not an issue of morality, are you serious? What do you think does drive these sciences in the first place? It's not just for the fun of it I can tell you that much. And also, I guess you've got another problem on your hands cause I find the enviromental crisis to be very much real and clear an issue of importance as anything can be. Try to think of your own and children's future, and not just 3 generations ahead.
TheHardProblem 10 months ago
@TheThunderduck Obviously you didn't watch the whole thing or comprehend any of it. At 3:23, and at 5:00 he presents what are called... yeah, you guessed it, facts. Facts that debunk the stance that Penn and Teller are spinning. Putting the word "no" in capital letters just makes you look more desperate. Sorry, you're the failure here. Try to acknowledge an opposing stance before you put your foot in your mouth and act like you're a debating guru when you're just an idiot.
ThaddeusRobe 9 months ago
You're not even arguing anything. You're as condescending and insulting towards them as they are to environmental groups.
Pot, meet kettle.
superuberbob 1 year ago 17
@corpsmanup87 - with respect, those are good points but I would personally characterize those as "Libertarian" ideas before I would as "left". I don't have a lot of time for this, but for example, consider that Pat Robertson, hardly a leftist, just came out in favor of legalizing marijuana.
jarmbru 1 year ago
1:10
Seriously? One breath of unclean air will result in your death? A LITTLE exaggeration you think?
Your argument is full of more BS than the BS BS is investigating.
Austinbit 1 year ago
I LOVE penn&teller! They are really the most important thing on media, and that is because they base their arguments on fact not in emotions...
JanneT32W 1 year ago
you know that you've been taught all wrong. right? your not saving the planet. your saving your way of life. cars, houses, computers, ect. the planet has been around for billions of years. gone threw millions of changes. it was a ball of ice, not a ice age, but a big ball of ice. so get off your high horse and started telling us what your really trying to save. SAVE OUR TV'S........SAVE OUR INTERNET......SAVE OUR STARBUCKS
titoslim23 1 year ago
I've lived in Santa Cruz, and it's full of well-intentioned dipshits like these.
ClumsyRoot 1 year ago
and about the ,,misleading text'' i guess you didnt hear when penn said that no one even ASKED what DiHydro Monoxide is!
persiangeorgiev 1 year ago
where is your scientific data
persiangeorgiev 1 year ago
@Sombomombo - That's "you're" not "your". Besides that you are largely unintelligible. Good luck in life.
jarmbru 1 year ago
68 likes 178 dislikes
hmm
fuck you
Sombomombo 1 year ago
Random girl? Dude, YOU are a random person posting videos (bad ones) on a video posting website full of random people posting random videos, so by your logic, no one should give a crap what you say. (Not that anyone does.) Work on your debating skills dude. Oh and please grab a dictionary and look up the word debunk. Thanks
dentarthrudent100 1 year ago
your editing really sucks balls. in fact so do your arguments. normally i dont resort to insults but man, youre not even worth attempting to argue with intelligently. you really, really, really suck at doing rebuttal videos. i suggest you check out howtheworldworks on here. thats how you do a rebuttal.
batmanrules1014 1 year ago
@skiddlebrain - better a tard than an ego wanker like you. You are an ego wanker, you ego wanker. Gosh you're smart.
jarmbru 1 year ago
@jarmbru
regardless of what he is, your a fucking pussy with your insults
just bringing that up. I'm on your side though don't get me wrong.
Sombomombo 1 year ago
There is much debate about Gravity and Evolution. Please try to do at least a little research before making these videos. Oh, and there is water to keep far more people alive than there is food (almost a billion more), and these people that you are defending are against any means of producing more food. You also cut to clips that are as random as the people Penn talks to (if not more considering journalists have less credentials than Bullshit's research team and the scientists they interview.
skiddlecrumms 1 year ago
Comment removed
darfunkelidas 1 year ago
craziest part of your sht is that they aren't against evironmentalism! Their issue is that there are too many of you hyper activists that don't actually listen to the facts as you point to in your episode. "soooo whaaaaat"? HE WAS A FREAKIN' FOUNDER!!! and he saw where it was going!!!!!!! come on dude. Insert as you feel, no one believes ecology is not an area that needs to be adressed, but sensationalism is ridiculous on any side and should not be the factor to gain support!
Zootrocks 1 year ago
this is the worst video i have ever seen
cazza55 1 year ago
Nice try, but you're not quite hitting the mark. All the other arguments about and against your information are correct. I don't like the fact that they have to try to insult you or belittle you for THINKING. That makes them look just plain stupid. So keep questioning everything. And you really did leave out the data that P & T referenced in the program.
frame199 1 year ago
I really like how the whole time he is asking for the science that makes the argument, but cuts it out when they talk about it.
Proactivehistory 1 year ago
FAIL!!
ZombiesAteMySanity 1 year ago
Nevermind that technology is what has actually led to cleaner air and water.
th3gr8juan 1 year ago
Those freshman classes have really expanded your horizons. You really need to look at sampling parameters etc...before you start screaming no sciece. Because there is no sciece in environmental hysteria, just anal-retentive Liberal politics. You twit.
WorldWalker88 1 year ago
Holy, you're retarded.
slugger1983 1 year ago
Wow, this video is complete fail, you should be flogged for stupidity
skellion6969 1 year ago
I apparently misunderstand the meaning of the term "debunked". I thought it was to provide evidence to show that something is wrong or false. Please explain what you mean by "debunked", because I saw nothing of the sort. I had to read "The Skeptical Environmentalist" back in college a few years ago; this book has all the evidence you need to draw your own conclusions, which happens to be the same evidence that is used by environmentalist proponents to "prove" that we are in bad shape.
sscitan 1 year ago
@sscitan P.S. Your whole video made me facepalm, but the one part that really shows that you lack the ability to pay attention (or didn't care enough to) is the part where you claim that P&T are unable/didn't respond to the environmentalist claim that global warming is occuring at an alarming rate. If you see the segment from the gentleman from the CATO Institution, he says that our average temperature has increased by 1 degree in 100 years, and that this trend isn't enough to be alarmed.
sscitan 1 year ago
The episode is about environmental hysteria, that's why they concentrate on strange participants.
And your cute little interjected videos are anecdotal evidence at best. Where is YOUR science?
ict2k 1 year ago
Comment removed
MrOzzyboy321 1 year ago
These guys are right wing cheerleaders. Where are the Bullshit episodes on Islam as practiced by Obama, or the Foreign birth of Obama? Where's the episode on The Existence of Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq? Where are the episodes on Tea Party Hysteria or "Mission Accomplished"? It's the pot calling the kettle black.
jarmbru 1 year ago
@jarmbru Actually, you are retarded. they are hardcore libertarian. The show is menat for comedy, not to point out all of the shit we already know about.
skiddlecrumms 1 year ago
@jarmbru here are some left wing issues they support through their show
-legalization of weed
-legalization of prostituiton
-same sex marriage
-teaching evolution over creationism
-teaching sex ed. in High school (not just absinence only)
-Anything that undermines Censorship
CorpsmanUP87 1 year ago
And for anyone who believes that humans are causing catastrophic global warming, 31,000 scientists, 9,000 of which have Ph D's, signed a petition stating that global warming is not true. Are any of us that have responded to this video smart enough to say that all of them are wrong? I doubt it. Although I'm certain there are plenty of people who are arrogant enough.
metalguitarist03 1 year ago
Kate wasn't a "random girl." The Rainforest Action Network chose her to be their spokesperson. You're a moron and it's obvious that you didn't actually pay attention to what was going on or being said. Fail
metalguitarist03 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
you are an idiot
sleep1 1 year ago
This debunks NOTHING not one single item was "debunked", and the wikipedia you show was nothing more than slander and even evidence of green-peace's anti-corporate agenda.
lordpoee 1 year ago
i almost finished it, 2 minutes away. all hes doing here is stroking his and his friend's eco hard-ons and doesn't even make a formal argument, im waiting for the carbon taxes to cause a depression maybe most of the middle class social and psychological bubbles will be popped and wake these hippie posers rethink themselves and their views when they see anything out of the ordinary
majikninja07 1 year ago
@directedchaos your terrible at this please don't try again
majikninja07 1 year ago
directedbullshit
IGNsucks 1 year ago
Haha. If you think there's no debate over gravity, you better think again.
philnoll 1 year ago
Problem one. You stated a communist country, She is a rank officer to a orginzation. that is fair gain. Forest are stronger then ever :)
Again the air is in a communist country the very thing enviromentalist are fighting to turn our nation into.
You continue to use comunist countrys to prove capitalism...Is....bad???
goverments have more to do with enviroment then corporations. if a company pollutes it destroys itself
ebilly99 1 year ago
im surprised that a lot of the comments think your arguments are stupid -- they're right, but im still surprised.
MunroviaPictures 1 year ago
@MunroviaPictures same here dude, who knew so many people had there heads on right unlike this asshole.
IGNsucks 1 year ago
Wow...so in response to what you label as misleading vividness (a false accusation on your part by the way) you engage in...misleading vividness. One village in China is no more a representative sample than one day in Washington. I see no reason to even listen to any more of your garbage.
As to why the accusation of misleading vividness was erroneous on your part:
There is no underlying claim that a beautiful day proves there is not a problem with pollution.
mariogreymist1991 1 year ago
3:31 oooooh Wikipedia! How resourceful!
Let's just get something straight. Straw men, poisoned wells, misleading vividness, and personal attacks are not fallacies. They are at worst underhanded ethos arguments. To be perfectly honest you're also guilty of most of the "fallacies" you call Penn & Teller out on.
Clearly you support environmentalism and I can respect that. But I do disagree with the modern movement. I support responsible development, not a halt of progress.
VitalVampyr 1 year ago
Anyone who quotes their references for the purposes of scientific knowledge is an idiot. Tried to watch all three parts, but could not take the helium-voiced, trite interjections of the director. Poorly produced and equally ineffective in convincing me against the views of "Bullshit".
smic311 1 year ago
Hmmm... "random girl" ?
It seems to me the organization got to pick a rep. for themselves..
As much as P&T are 'over the top' at times I don't think you've debunked much.
Peekingduck 1 year ago
There are as many (if not more) holes in this guy's 'debunking' as there are in this specific episode of Penn & Teller's BS. But at least with Penn & Teller's BS, I was entertained.
Eitelsama 1 year ago
No science whatsoever. I don't like the drum beating self righteous "hippies"(so called) either, but that doesn't mean that the entire scientific community is dead wrong. Climate change is a fact and anyone who says otherwise has not done their research.(and I mean scientific journal research)
CanadianRunner 1 year ago
Hey, thanks for making this video. I love Penn and Teller and they are usually quite rational, if not biased, in their shows. But I was dismayed at the huge amount of Bullshit in this one.
No science whatsoever. I don't like the drum beating self righteous "hippies"(so called) either, but that doesn't mean that the entire scientific community is dead wrong. Climate change is a fact and anyone who says otherwise has not done their research.(and I mean scientific journal research)
CanadianRunner 1 year ago
@CanadianRunner Yeah this one kind of destroyed their credibility to me. If there's one thing I'm certain of, it's global warming/climate change, and it's clear that they never really worked in a way to actually uncover the "truth". They knew what they wanted to hear from the start. It's easy to debunk ESP, talking to the dead, etc. But in this one they let their political (libertarian, CATO fellows) views get in the way of their objectivity.
YUHaiwing 1 year ago
Thanks for the debunking. When I watched this episode I was pretty disappointed in Penn and Teller because I knew that most of what they said was "bullshit." Now it's hard for me to take them seriously on other stuff. Good to see someone took the time to debunk it.
Oh, and other people... if you actually read the description/watch for more than 30 seconds you'll know that the author is actually debunking the supposed debunking, so yeah...
YUHaiwing 1 year ago
3:35
All right Wikipedia university here I come!
This is where i say fuck you to this video and anyone who takes this guy seriously.
Kain5th 1 year ago
@Kain5th You clearly have no other argument. Wikipedia is kind of sketchy, but it's actually pretty good at simply saying things and being quick and easy to find. In the end I have read enough in my research for school that was not from wikipedia to know that in this case wikipedia was more or less right.
YUHaiwing 1 year ago
Get a life
greendayfan000000 1 year ago
Hey guys let's point out logical fallacies on a show where they openly said they were biased. Maybe the little smartass here was too busy with his own strawman's arguments to see the big picture.
tlages 1 year ago
@tlages Sure, but admitting their bias doesn't make it better. Fact is many people don't know this, and accept this show as truth.
YUHaiwing 1 year ago
"everything has water in it?" yes.
HowAboutSomeTruth1 1 year ago
Btw gravity IS debated, ever heard of physics? and so is evolution (not necessarily in terms of religion).
HowAboutSomeTruth1 1 year ago
You know, they intend on ending the show with an episode on "bullshit about bullshit". Dissing their own tactics of making people look bad.
HowAboutSomeTruth1 1 year ago
@HowAboutSomeTruth1 That's good, their tactics are quite bad. Usually they are right (like against ESP, talking to dead, etc.) but this time they are horribly wrong. It's a shame that they can be so condescending towards a view when they are obviously the ones full of shit.
YUHaiwing 1 year ago
Random girl? The person the organization chose to be it's spokesperson for a nationally broadcast TV show is a "random girl"? Whats funny is how much time they spent driving that point home, and you still reduce her to a "random girl"
gramamge33 1 year ago
@gramamge33 The point is that she's just clearly not good for TV. She's stumbling the whole time, not because she necessarily has no knowledge, but because she's nervous. Also, why do they talk to a nervous college kid and not an actual scientist? The only really reputable climate change advocate they talked to was Ross Gelbspan, and they talked over him and called him an "asshole."
YUHaiwing 1 year ago
I love how Youtube has the words 'Most disliked in red text, in the description. This zitfaced little shit makes this video, speaking super quietly because Mommy is sleeping in the next room, and basically proves nothing. Not a fucking thing. What about the creator of the Weather Channel and the 30,000 other science experts that filed a lawsuit against Al Gore?? Global warming & environmental hysteria are bullshit. Please go back to the mall and order an Orange Julius. Oh, and please fuck off.
DevSodDribble 1 year ago
@DevSodDribble I have heard that, but upon googling it (the 30000 scientists) I found not one reputable source. Show me a reputable article that states this, like from BBC, CNN, some kind of actual news network. Until then I have to assume someone dreamed it up.
YUHaiwing 1 year ago
@YUHaiwing Right here on YouTube, a CNN story: watch?v=FfHW7KR33IQ
DevSodDribble 1 year ago
@DevSodDribble That's Fox News, which isn't a reputable source really. And the lawsuit hasn't been filed yet (look it up. There's not a single mainstream news source for this other than this Fox News vid). Also the 30000 figure is questionable at best. Polling of scientists shows that they overwhelmingly support the anthropogenic climate change hypothesis. Wiki is not perfect, but this is well sourced (wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change).
YUHaiwing2 1 year ago
@DevSodDribble Also, there might never have been 30000 to start. Look at the first thing on google when you type in "john coleman 30 000 scientists"
YUHaiwing2 1 year ago
wait a sec... i was going to ignore most of your BS... but you attacked moore through an excerpt in a Wikipedia page that was not descriptive at all?
shit... even Trolls couldn't come up with that bad of an argument.
CarsitoPyg 1 year ago
you suck at life faggot
ThePythagoran 1 year ago
hahaha directedchaos you used the exact same point they used to try and prove them wrong. after they said a nice day in D.C. and then you said yea that's one day in one place. which is a good point. however, you go on and use one day in one place to say the world is polluted. and yes there should always be debate. because just 50 some years ago scientists were POSITIVE that atoms were the smallest things in the world. now we know of electrons protons and neutrons.
hailmary7283 1 year ago
@hailmary7283 Dudes not making a well-funded documentary here... there's a lot of evidence for what he said, but he's a random dude on youtube. Don't expect full-length documentary quality for a youtube movie.
YUHaiwing 1 year ago
@YUHaiwing my point was that he did a terrible job. And i was pointing out that his criticisms were often times hypocriticale. even for youtube this was terrible.
hailmary7283 1 year ago
@hailmary7283 I don't think so. Firstly, I think his point was not so much that the debate was over: It's that when the vast majority of scientists have consensus on an issue, it's no longer time for "debate" but action. There's no time for more "debate" on a serious issue of this kind.
Also, I mean you have never seen water/air pollution things on the news? He just used one example because it's obvious that there is a lot of bad air and water. You don't need to beat that horse for long.
YUHaiwing2 1 year ago
@YUHaiwing2 yea but saying i see bad air on the news is just the same as saying i see nice air outside. and i don't deny there isn't pollution there is and we should cut down on it. but when you compare global warming to Gravity and evolution. you are trying to say the debate is over.
hailmary7283 1 year ago
@hailmary7283 There's still "debate" about evolution too. Gravity isn't really debated, other than the intricate details of it in physics circles. Things should be debated, but when facing such scientific consensus there should really be action taken... debate is good, but when the fate of the world rests on the timeliness and strength of your decisions, it's wise to act fast, with the direction from experts. The "debate" isn't over, but at this point we've got to take action as if it is.
YUHaiwing 1 year ago
@YUHaiwing no i agree about there being debate about evolution. but whenever someone wants to say that the debate is over they typically (almost always in fact) point to evolution and gravity.
hailmary7283 1 year ago
Sorry dude... but P&T kinda stuck a stake through your asses on this one. Your counterpoints are just plain ridiculous. P&T simply asked you to stop using the environment as a facade and just come out in the open and admit that your real agenda is political not scientific. They just asked you to be honest. They even admitted that they think there are good arguments for socialism. You are the frauds here... pretending to be scientists instead of political activists.
Mrparrot73 1 year ago
couldnt u just upload it without editing it?
BloodyHarder 1 year ago
P&T are still a lot more convincing than you. Go on and do your homeworks again, you greenie idiot!
simonhoule 1 year ago
CUNT
hislipsaremoving 1 year ago
Man Bear Pig is cereal....I'm super duper cereal...why won't anyone believe me????
mikeywizo 1 year ago
1/5
HayrettinBalci 1 year ago
this debunking is bullshit.P&T make good points the environmental moement has no structure,most of the people who are put/nominated in as "leaders" have very few credentials.I am an environmentalist but i wouldnt associate with these lumpheads.There heart is in the right place but they need to wake up
oreolvrs 2 years ago
what i like is they show both sides and allow people to see what the real deal is
norcallogger 1 year ago
Water is a chemical. (Every molecular structure is.) And she didn't say it was "new," she said it's "being used now." (If I say I'm sitting in a chair "now," that doesn't mean I think chairs are new.) The whole point of the H2O experiment was to see if people would sign something without knowing anything about it. And they proved their point.
ShawnRavenfire 2 years ago
I always wish they would go further with experiments like that, and get larger samples. They make some good points, but it's hard to draw conclusions on a hand-full of people.
poorkinghaggard 1 year ago
dude your "debunking" is kind of missing the whole point of the argument.. try convincing someone who doesn't already agree with you.
jefferywang 2 years ago
it´s funny that you are comparing their "facts" from 2003 with the "facts" AFTER 2003 till now ;-)
think about it!!!
AAUTGLimp 2 years ago
The girl you mentioned in the start wasnt a random girls he was a speaker..
JohanAtheist 2 years ago
Just because at some place in the world some people dont have acess to water and just because some places in the world people dont have acess to fresh air and finally yes our water is not worse today even our worst food and water currently gotten from places like USA and Europe is better than we have had in the past our worst discount products and other water is the best humans have ever had till now.
JohanAtheist 2 years ago 3
This. Is. Retarded. Who would waste their time with this!? You don't even have any good points! Terrible.
Eviljubs 2 years ago 2
@directedchaos
I think your kinda missing the point here...
nielander 2 years ago 2
1)penn meant that no enviroment catastrophe had happen even though many scientest belived it was going to happen.
2)they never claimed that the air in gergyo wasnt polluted.
3)because socialism is bad for the enviroment.
4)they use the same missleading tactics as enviromentalist groups to get ppl to try to ban something they really dont know anything about. everything is a chemical(thats basic knowledge). u dont seem to listen to what they are saying.
Uuuuurk 2 years ago
U trash Patrick Moore but he didn´t leave Greenpeace because he is was offered a job as a lobbist, he leaved because he thought the were to extremist, part of this has to do when the Berlin wall went down and a lot of communist joined the enviromental movement.
I hope that u r not one of those assholes that say that mankind is the "cancer" of the planet
LeDiableBlanck 2 years ago 2
I believe we definitely have environmental problems. I think they are just trying to prove as I have also exeperienced working as an environmental canvasser that most people in the environmental movement are uninformed middle class people who participate to feel good and believe sensationalism works better than scientific data. So they did not need any. The show wasn't Global Warming or Water Pollution is Bullshit. Just the fanaticism behind these problems
johnbstl 2 years ago
@ RichardMNixon
They are very political in all of their shows, but at least they are not trying to hide it.
I think their shows encourage people to think for themselves, not necessarily to think like them.
At least thats what i get out of it. :)
Narcissoid 2 years ago
I get that you might disagree with P&Ts points of view, but you are not proving anything with this 10 minute waste of time. All you did was hiding some the points presented in the show to make them less credible and ridicule the few remaining points.
Its okay to be skeptic about their shows (as they are skeptics themselves), but I'm sure you would be able to come up with something much better if you worked a lot harder on it.
Narcissoid 2 years ago 2
haha directedChaos is a fucking moron. Epic FAIL.
StrongmanTaylor 2 years ago 22
I would guess he's crying now because of the whole Climategate deal. And buying into the "It's only TWO SCIENTISTS" bull.
danboj 2 years ago
@StrongmanTaylor How so? Is it because he does not agree with your views? Sorry man, I'm gonna have to side with directedChaos here. He made some good arguments, while they best you could do was right an empty personal attack and use an internet cliche, a good one I will admit, but a cliche nonetheless. In short, you sir are the one who is FAIL.
YUHaiwing 1 year ago
FAIL
garylevington 2 years ago
No, people should not sign something that says "I want to ban something that I don't really know about," regardless of what it is in reality.
Knonsense981 2 years ago
unfortunately this is how many bills are rammed down our throats in congress.
CraigMMiller001 2 years ago
You offer no sources whatsoever. Penn and Teller had them on at the end, while you just put in random video clips probably without lisceensed consent.
If you want to debate them, it's your choice. However, only debate them if you know what you are talking about.
MrVercetti44 2 years ago 2
Now /= new.
Excessive water --> excessive urination. Try it.
The language that they use is somewhat tricky, but it is reasonable. While they don't prove that these people have been drawn in to what they are doing by similar language, they have shown that it is at least plausible.
Straw men are not always fallacious if they are used in a part of a larger argument. Refuting or discrediting a weaker version of an argument is legitimate if the complete argument is addressed at some point.
Knonsense981 2 years ago 3
@Knonsense981 I don't think it's reasonable. It's clearly a leading question. Moreover, it proves absolutely nothing. So some hippies at a hippie convention signed a petition, who cares. It's a bad way to supposedly debunk environmental science.
YUHaiwing 1 year ago
Great job, P&T is a great show, very well done, but their thinking is a leaky bucket.
korona3103 2 years ago
I think the biggest issue is they have a pretty strong political leaning and probably went into this without the possibility of changing their minds, which is very unscientific. The news clips did a pretty good job of pointing out just how many problems there are in the world.
Contrarily I do think the dihydrogen monoxide bit was legitimate. It showed that promoting fear was an effective way to get signatures without the people signing even thinking twice. I wonder how many didn't sign though.
RichardMNixon 2 years ago 2