Do you know what would help the planet? Not opposing nuclear power and GM crops. Are you anti-nuclear or against climate change? Set your priorities right. They ruined that ad for me.
I feel sorry for the brainwashed greenies, sounds like such a sad life, living in ignorance, deluded, i blame the governments though, everything in this world is for money, one day you guys will feel so dumb.
@M4rple we are not killing the planet. the planet is forever changing, sometimes for the good, sometimes for the bad, theres NOTHING we can do to stop it! yes, i agree that we should be more cautious of pollution in built up areas (like london!) as it creates a horrendous atmosphere, and we should be more careful for wildlife and greenery, however i do not for a second believe that we are causing the ice caps to melt, or global warming. what caused global warming & ice age last time, animal poo?
That video was really good, and even tough a lot of people disagree with the message I for one really enjoy it. A clever way to put the message in an entertaining way. And its hard not to join the Rebellion. Nice Line.
Fuck greenshit you are a bunch of ignorant hippies,did you even know that it's not pollution that is responsible for global warming?It's just a fase of the earth,do some research you fucking hippies,oh wait you don't know how to read!!
@Eriksz So basically, you're totally fine with the destruction of our planet. Sure it will be hell for future generations, but hey - who cares about that? Clearly not you and 3 other morons.
@Eriksz Oh yes, I am clearly the deluded one here. Why don't you do your research first and then we can discuss things. P.S. While CO2 emissions are miniscule in comparison to other sources that contribute to global warming, it's still a part of it. Even if it's not as much as airplanes, meat packing plants, or other factories, it's still adds up. I mean come on, the majority of the entire world drives cars.
my next car is going to be a VW just because they have pissed of Greenpeace, and i am going to be painting on it "i'm feeding the planet by making co2"
The source of energy that uses the least amount of natural resources and has the lowest emissions per kWh is nuclear power.
Greenpeace opposes that.
If we develop generation IV nuclear power, all of the uranium that has been mined so far can be used again, equivalent of recycling 50-100 times. This also lowers the time needed for waste storage by more than 99%. With Gen IV we can also use weapons plutonium to make clean energy while destroying the plutonium.
Green Peace lets be a little bit more open minded, fair and honest, yes they increased CO2 emissions, but they increase the MPG by 21% and emissions only goes up 8%. So if you look at it with a real thoughts, you would relies that in the end we are really putting let CO2 in all back in the planet because the car can go farther, and uses less gas as well. We all know GP does use wagon/buggies. So stop acting like SOB's, and get real.
Make tighter legislation against car emissions, AS LONG as you keep away from the supercars. I don't care if you think that a gas-guzzling Ferrari kills the planet. Supercars are meant to be insane, not toned down because of some arse who think that they spit cyanide out the tailpipes.
And really if it bothers you so much then design a Bio-ethanol or Hydrogen V12 (which inevitable will have more hp than petrol) and make a mint in the process.
COME ON ECO-STUPIDS THE CO2 IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE EARTH´S WARMING. EARTH´S WARMING IS BECAUSE THE SUN, IT´S NATURAL. ECO STUPIDS ARE GROWING BECAUSE IT´S ONLY A COMUNIST BUSINESS. TEAM WITH ALL CAR MAKERS AND TOP GEAR ¡¡
Guess what Greenpeace, I'm still gonna buy a VW and I'm still gonna love every minute of it. It's gonna take more than tackling CO2 emissions from cars to save the world, nobody is gonna make me feel guilty about driving a VW or any other car for that matter.
So instead of targeting, say, Dodge or similar, they target the car maker with the most fuel efficient small-medium car in the world, who sell more cars that use less than 7L/100km than most other brands, and they honestly think cars do ANYTHING to cause damage to the environment when compared to countries like India and China, who they could target with an ad campaign to put pressure on.
you do realize that VW's hardly make any CO2, they burn so little gas because their engines are tiny and efficient. And making one and running it for an entire lifetime will never cause as much environmental damage as it does to make a damn Prius
dear Greenpeace, you can make the earth more green by stop using computers and electronics or even better, you live like the stone age! or should Colonel Kilgore help you to get back to the stone age?
@MrFeelingAwesome You obviously don't know anything about internal combustion engines! Diesels are far, far dirtier than petrols. Diesel Particulate Filters in the exhausts help a massive amount, but they are very troublesome for mechanics (guess how I know!).
@Ayrshore Well, you must be a shitty mechanic. Several trustworthy sources have outright said that Diesel engines are generally more fuel efficient because diesel contains more energy per gallon than gasoline.
Pretty sure VW Makes the most fuel-efficient cars on the planet. This makes sense. I guess GreenPeace is still all like "Y U NO USE ELECTRIC?!", still not aware that electric cars use the same amount of fossil fuels.
@GunsOfThePhoenix Yeah, it's not the best of targets for Greenpeace to pick to spread their message. But I suppose they think all car manufacturers are 'the enemy', which I suppose is true for them to a certain degree.
i hate greenpeace, PETA, ALF and any other group that makes my life miserable i got 3 of my videos taken down because i didn't put the stupid disclaimer that no animals were harmed in the making of this film Fuck them All, i want to publicly go and shoot hamsters skeet style
I've been in a dilemma about what car I should purchase, Golf gti, evo abarth or a mini S. After seeing this, I'm so going for the VW golf, eat that hippy faggots.
VW and Audi suck with their clean 2l Diesels. I'll make sure that I buy next time one of these 7l gasoline Engines from Ford, GM or some other American Company. I just want to help the world! :D
Please ignore the efficiency of VW engines behind the curtain. Everything is black and white... except Greenpeace... which is magically um... ideologically blinded.
One of the main purposes of a parody is to provoke thought and discussion and although the content is a little too far reaching and jumbled to be effective, the fact that Lucas got his panties in a wad and is trying to shut it down, validates the video.
Pity on you @WillShakespeare2007... it's not about population levels or whatsoever! Neither is the price of cars.
It's just the need of wise resource usage. When the industries oppose regulations for their own profit, they are screwing the planet with unneccessary waste.
It's just stupid to think people are gonna to get rid of cars... it's just a fair requirement to industry: behave properly!
@aalliieenn99 anyone who believes we can just continue to grow the population of this planet has problems dealing with reality..where does the food come from??more farming? pushing more species from their homes for farmland.oceans are overfished to feed the population we have..forests can barely keep up with the needs of the wealthy 10% of the planet...where do the other 90% fit in...don't they get a piece of the dream?...you can't have it both ways....we have the resources or we don't..
@aalliieenn99 you are dead right..but the "other story" is the one that is ignored...and that...not some evil CO2 junk science video by green peace is going to change anything for the better. ...VW engineers have rightly decided that CO2 is NOT a threat to the planet..NOT..I applaud them for not joining the other sheep....science is supposed to trump theory..yet somehow the THEORY or global warming has won out...theory is the seed of science not fruit...it is to open discussion/debate not end it
I also was pointing out to @WillShakespeare2007 that this video in particular is not demanding halt on the production of cars, neither does greenpeace demand that... It's all about fair trade. They lobby against regulations - which could threaten their profit - becomes more nasty when they show themself up to consumers as a company concerned about the environment.
Hey look, children everywhere in this video. I bet none of you have ever driven a fucking car neverless bought a wolksvagen. Go back to your basements cunt dwellers and read more Fox News shit about globar warming. You know its ONLY supported by every major organization in the world, if the Tea Party says it doesnt exists it must NOT obviously.
I like my second hand Golf. I reckon it's a lot better than buying a new Prius chock full of lithium batteries. And it will probably run for 200,000 miles. And Greenpeace are boring. But still, come on, this is funny.
I'm pretty fuckin sure that andy gates and a lot of freaking people at greenpeace still uses gasoline cars, or do they drive a bike to go to work or walk, perhaps they walk instead of drive when they go to vacations.
@yzaluka Im sure you are right, but if more affordable more eco friendly options were available that would all change. take a look at the report on "vwdarkside" its an interesting read.
@Exildeutscher correct....and we have NO CLUE as to what too much or too little is...monkeying with things we don't understand is never a good idea....basing an entire world economy on unproven science is just as bad. Google new ice age coming, and see just how little we understand
@fupabox Also correct but surely by mindlessly blowing Co2 into the atmosphere we are destined to hit the too much mark sooner or later. Now don't get me wrong, I'm by no means a full on environmentalist but as I said, or rather implied, in my previous message, it's all about moderation.
@Ayrshore How about you learn some facts and then post? "Climate change" is a process that describes - guess what - climate change; global warming describes a small part of it that's become evident in the last 100 years.
A person who *wants* to know the *facts* just needs to google; try "global warming wiki" and "climate change wiki". Info is there if you want to find it.
@Ayrshore Yes, climate has changed over time. But these cycles are well understood and that's not what's going on right now. Solar output is not changing much, in fact until very recently it was decreasing. All measured by NASA satellites pointed at the sun. During all this time the earth was getting warmer.
@TheLogicalError How can we "well understand" something that happened in the past, when we couldn't see it and had no way of measuring it. It was a 'best guess', that's all.
@Ayrshore We -do- have ways to measuring things in the past, and we've been measuring by hand for almost 2 centuries. Just because you do not understand how this is possible, doesn't make it impossible. The global warming theory didn't just drop out of the air, it's almost a hundred years old! And the scientific 'debate' had already settled on this in the late 1970's!
@HomoCyberneticus "MAN MADE GLOBAL WARMING IS NOT A FACT" when are people going to get it through their heads...it is a THEORY!!!!......unproven,hotly debated by environmental scientists,and at the moment nothing more than a political stance.....argue it til you are blue in the face...it doesn't make it true
@fupabox So is the theory of relativity, or the theory of plate tectonics. Just because it's a 'theory' doesn't mean you can just safely ignore it. It just means you misunderstood the scientific process. ALL science is theory. ALL science is a best guess. If you think that science can be 100% sure about anything, you misunderstood the scientific process once again. And it's only 'hotly debated' among amateurs, not among the people who actually work on this kind of stuff full-time.
@Ayrshore Yes, all science -is- theory. The way it basically works is that you come up with a theory, and everybody tries to disprove it. And it'll remain standing until a better theory comes along. That's how you get closer and closer to truth. It's basically applying evolution to ideas.
@TheLogicalError the use of the word evolution is misleading as it posits a choice in physiological change..the correct term is advantageous mutation ..IE. a change in physiological or biological make-up that results in a net benefit for the mutated organism..this mutation being advantageous, trumps the current form and over time becomes the norm
@TheLogicalError unfortunately ideals and agendas often get in the way..especially if the masses have become convinced and are willing to back it with their wallets...when governments open chequebooks to those supporting man-made global warming it isn't hard to see what side some researchers will take.. what is the harm in reducing pollution under the guise of "global warming"? it has pushed creativity and new avenues of thought..for that it is a positive..closing all debate is however is not!
@fupabox What's going on in the public arena is not a debate. It's propaganda. The same invalid points are repeating over and over again even though they've been debunked long ago and it's the goal of some people to make GW to look as if it's invalid. As for your remark towards research money, how many millionaire scientists do you know? These are just classic character assassination techniques. Don't like the message or messenger? Kill the messenger.
@TheLogicalError And I say it is the point of some to make GW appear valid..which invalid points are you referring to? The ones touted by Al Gore the godfather of the GW mania?..the work of fiction he released under the guise of a documentary? Did I at any time make mention of "millionaire scientists"?..researchers follow the grant money..it feeds their families and who can blame them...too many people choose a position and only read arguments that support that position..that's faith not science
@fupabox Al gore is not "the godfather of the GW mania" and definitely stretched the truth on some things, which didn't really help the case of those who are genuinely trying to educate people about GW. The points I'm refering to are numerous, one often brought up point is the warming in medieval times, which has been debunked long ago. Considering the hostility from some very powerful (and rich) institutions against GW, a scientist would easily earn much more by proving that GW is false.
@fupabox Yes I am, but at the moment all evidence (and there's a lot of it) points to the contrary. So my best guess is that it's indeed very real. I'd actually be thrilled if it turned out to be false.
@TheLogicalError I can assume we agree to dis-agree..but the debate is enjoyable and necessary if the truth is to be found..there are motivations on both sides of the argument that are not wholly about finding the truth..I too hope that it turns out to be a false alarm,but keep my mind open..
@TheLogicalError All science is not theory...water boils at 212 degrees with variations for barometric pressure...that is NOT theory...the moon is approx. 250k miles from the earth give or take ,again with certain variable...a measurable fact..we did not get lucky and and have 12 different men walk on the moon's surface on a theory...it was math and physics..sciences not theories...E=MC2 is theory ..2 NO + O2 → 2 NO2 is nitrogen dioxide...fact,not theory
@fupabox I'm sorry but you're a bit confused here. In science, a "theory" is not some loose unconfirmed guess. A scientific theory is not a hypothesis. A scientific theory is a hypothesis that has been confirmed to accurately match and predict reality.
Gravity for instance is a scientific theory. Water boiling at 100 degrees C is a scientific theory. E=mc^2 is a scientific theory, and it is accurate: it's where nuclear power plants get their energy from.
@fupabox When John and Jane Doe say "I have a theory", the scientist says "I have a hypothesis". Then John and Jane say "This is fact", the scientist says "This is the current theory and model".
A scientific theory *is* what we in everyday speech call "fact".
@mkarnerfors whether you call it "theory" or hypothesis" man made global warming is still unproven....when someone argues semantics it usually means they have lost the debate and are resorting to diversion.
@fupabox No, it is not unproven. Apart from a very vocal minority - that are pretty much akin to teenagers with authority issues - the consensus is that AGW is proven.
@fupabox So either it's a cycle that we cannot change and we all die, or it's something that we can change. Let's make it so both possible ways ensure our demise. Is that what you're saying?
@kungguld Not at all..cleaning the environment and reducing pollution is what we should be doing..being environmentally aware is just good stewardship of our planet.But bowing to and basing policy on the unproven MMGW ,and attacking anyone not in lock-step with the theory is wrong. It brings about stupid legislation such as banning incandescent bulbs and replacing them with dangerous CFLs...action for the sake of action is neither intelligent or helpful
A scientific theory is not a random unconfirmed guess. That is instead call "a hypothesis". Once the hypothesis is confirmed to match reality and accurately predict reality, it's called a "scientific theory".
Gravity is a scientific theory. Evolution is a scientific theory. AGW is a scientific theory. All of them have been confirmed and validated against reality.
@mkarnerfors "All of them have been confirmed and validated against reality. "
Global Warming directly opposes reality though. What is actually happening now goes against everything the green movement has said will happen for the last 20 years.
@Ayrshore Another matter: scientist are now insisting on "climate change" because of the public, aka idiots who just wait for a cold weather front to come so they could gloat "Where's your global warming now?". Scientists admit the choice of name for the phenomenon is a bad one.
It doesn't have to get warm in your phreaking part of the planet to be true. Last time I checked, you share it with some 7 billion other humans - how about you start thinking of others as well?
@HomoCyberneticus they insist on using "climate change" but it can be used truthfully in a sentence....NOTE!! "manmade climate change" is not part of the current lexicon......because there is no proof.....believe what you wish ,but stop trying to force it on others and insulting anyone who dis-agrees...insult is not debate..
@fupabox Actually there is proof .. a lot of proof .. but you probably didn't take a chemistry class .. or you just didn't look over facts .. cause it's there .. all there. Now the results of us recarbonizing the atmosphere are still unknown - but we're definitely warming the planet.
@fupabox climatologists are not "split down the middle" on this topic. The vast majority believes that climate change is real and that it's man made. In fact, you'd probably be hard pressed to find any group of people to agree on anything in the percentages that climatologists agree on climate change.
@TheLogicalError The number of climatologists being churned out of universities since the GW issue came to the fore has risen exponentially...of course many of them are going to be on the side of Man made global warming..it justifies the diploma they just received and ensures funding ..ergo ..jobs in their chosen profession..not at all conclusive proof of a theory.
@fupabox That sounds like you believe it's just one big conspiracy. Couldn't it simply be that these students believe this because when presented with all the knowledge and evidence that it's simply the most logical explanation? Or do you believe these students aren't capable of thinking for themselves? As I mentioned before, there's more money to be made for a scientist to disprove GW than the reverse.
@TheLogicalError Having been to university I can assuredly say that a students opinion in most cases is that of the professor who is teaching the course. In most cases there is very little room for debate if you wish to graduate..It is not conspiracy ,but merely necessity...students in climate science classes these days are there because for the most part they believe in man-made GW..the course will confirm that notion because it is the founding reason for many of these courses..inter in a orbis
@HomoCyberneticus 'global' is not 'local'. Global warming means that the whole earth as a whole gets warmer. But local weather is a different beast entirely. Local weather is far less predictable. Did you know, for instance, that during the last cold winter in the USA that in the Philippines the temperatures hit record highs?
@TheLogicalError That would be something called BALANCE. If one place has a record low, and another has a record high - then the average is more or less maintained!
@Ayrshore You make 2 false assumptions here. First of all, these 2 events are not the only things that happened in that period, second of all, you assume all these events balance each other out; they do not.
@HomoCyberneticus Climate change is a natural thing. It has been about for many hundreds of thousands of years. It's got nothing to do with cars, or VW.
@fupabox There where some papers in the 1970's with theories that we where on the verge of a new ice age. The media picked up on these big time, even though the majority of papers at the time supported that the planet was warming instead. The ice age theories have long since been debunked. But somehow this idea that "scientists thought an ice age was coming" stuck.
@Ayrshore - Oh yes right because Greenpeace are what's wrong with the world by drawing attention to the destruction of the rain forests, depletion of ocean life and protecting endangered wildlife - yes fuck them! How dare they give a fuck about the planet.
@WillShakespeare2007 Greenpeace do stupid scaremonging and scapegoating - VW's most economic models are more expensive because they are MORE EXPENSIVE TO MAKE!
Same as how Greenpeace spent decades campaining against nuclear power, and now one of their former leaders says they got it wrong, nuclear is the way forward.
Greenpeace say we need to stop depending on oil, yet what does Rainbow Warrior 2 and all of their RIB's run on?
Do you know what would help the planet? Not opposing nuclear power and GM crops. Are you anti-nuclear or against climate change? Set your priorities right. They ruined that ad for me.
Skydromakk 3 weeks ago
Watch this Greenpeace ! youtube.com/watch?v=948Nm34arfA
darkdantepl 1 month ago
Bloody ecoterrorists ! Get a life !
darkdantepl 1 month ago
This video might force me to support SOPA so we can get it removed.
Highest contributors to greenhouse gasses: Cow farts and ant hills
*grabs Death star shaped magnifying glass*
mrtrag 1 month ago
I feel sorry for the brainwashed greenies, sounds like such a sad life, living in ignorance, deluded, i blame the governments though, everything in this world is for money, one day you guys will feel so dumb.
vwolop 1 month ago
@vwolop I feel so dumb for doing my research! (and just in case you didn't notice, I was being sarcastic there)
M4rple 1 month ago
@M4rple we are not killing the planet. the planet is forever changing, sometimes for the good, sometimes for the bad, theres NOTHING we can do to stop it! yes, i agree that we should be more cautious of pollution in built up areas (like london!) as it creates a horrendous atmosphere, and we should be more careful for wildlife and greenery, however i do not for a second believe that we are causing the ice caps to melt, or global warming. what caused global warming & ice age last time, animal poo?
vwolop 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Help me in my Jedi training as I confront Volkswagen's threats to Planet Earth vwdarkside (.) com/en/jedi/graham-meredith-502634
loadsapancakemix 1 month ago
That video was really good, and even tough a lot of people disagree with the message I for one really enjoy it. A clever way to put the message in an entertaining way. And its hard not to join the Rebellion. Nice Line.
EcuadorianFlagShip 1 month ago
who needs earth when you have a death star
MBrighty14 1 month ago 2
Fuck greenshit you are a bunch of ignorant hippies,did you even know that it's not pollution that is responsible for global warming?It's just a fase of the earth,do some research you fucking hippies,oh wait you don't know how to read!!
milstein91 2 months ago
Fuck you greenpeace with your climate global warming bullshit! Buying a VW next!
Eriksz 2 months ago
@Eriksz So basically, you're totally fine with the destruction of our planet. Sure it will be hell for future generations, but hey - who cares about that? Clearly not you and 3 other morons.
M4rple 1 month ago
@M4rple Basically You are an idiot who believes the global warming CON. Wake the fuck up.
Eriksz 1 month ago
@Eriksz Oh yes, I am clearly the deluded one here. Why don't you do your research first and then we can discuss things. P.S. While CO2 emissions are miniscule in comparison to other sources that contribute to global warming, it's still a part of it. Even if it's not as much as airplanes, meat packing plants, or other factories, it's still adds up. I mean come on, the majority of the entire world drives cars.
M4rple 1 month ago
@Eriksz Wow, someone needs to do their research. (Pssst! Greenpeace are working WITH Volkswagen - look it up!)
M4rple 1 month ago
Greenpeace is EVIL.
My next car will be a VW.
All hail the Republic!!
Streetpartymarty 2 months ago 7
This has been flagged as spam show
my next car is going to be a VW just because they have pissed of Greenpeace, and i am going to be painting on it "i'm feeding the planet by making co2"
rowleyparks 2 months ago
Comment removed
rowleyparks 2 months ago
The source of energy that uses the least amount of natural resources and has the lowest emissions per kWh is nuclear power.
Greenpeace opposes that.
If we develop generation IV nuclear power, all of the uranium that has been mined so far can be used again, equivalent of recycling 50-100 times. This also lowers the time needed for waste storage by more than 99%. With Gen IV we can also use weapons plutonium to make clean energy while destroying the plutonium.
Greenpeace opposes this too...
mkarnerfors 2 months ago
Green Peace lets be a little bit more open minded, fair and honest, yes they increased CO2 emissions, but they increase the MPG by 21% and emissions only goes up 8%. So if you look at it with a real thoughts, you would relies that in the end we are really putting let CO2 in all back in the planet because the car can go farther, and uses less gas as well. We all know GP does use wagon/buggies. So stop acting like SOB's, and get real.
christophertvf 4 months ago
FUCK THE DARK SIDE!!!
:D JOIN THE REBELLION!!!
Brognor 4 months ago
Fair enough.
Make tighter legislation against car emissions, AS LONG as you keep away from the supercars. I don't care if you think that a gas-guzzling Ferrari kills the planet. Supercars are meant to be insane, not toned down because of some arse who think that they spit cyanide out the tailpipes.
And really if it bothers you so much then design a Bio-ethanol or Hydrogen V12 (which inevitable will have more hp than petrol) and make a mint in the process.
MrFalconfly 4 months ago
COME ON ECO-STUPIDS THE CO2 IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE EARTH´S WARMING. EARTH´S WARMING IS BECAUSE THE SUN, IT´S NATURAL. ECO STUPIDS ARE GROWING BECAUSE IT´S ONLY A COMUNIST BUSINESS. TEAM WITH ALL CAR MAKERS AND TOP GEAR ¡¡
attorney1972 5 months ago
for me this is only marketing strategy ! what do you think?
fabrisicily86 5 months ago
It's true what you say and what you're against, but we also need to find another -100% working and cheap- solution to travel without pollution...
Ezkaton 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
well once the second one had been destroyed the Empire had to agree to a pretty tight sponsership deal....
Tarmack002 5 months ago
well once the second one had been destroyed the Empire had to agree to a pretty tight sponsership deal....
Tarmack002 5 months ago
There are other car manufacturers out there that are far worse. Why pick on a company that is trying!?
selwerderdwarsstraat 5 months ago
The best way to cut CO2 emissions is for all of the people affiliated with Greenpeace to stop breathing. CO2 problem solved.
moose4computers 6 months ago
Guess what Greenpeace, I'm still gonna buy a VW and I'm still gonna love every minute of it. It's gonna take more than tackling CO2 emissions from cars to save the world, nobody is gonna make me feel guilty about driving a VW or any other car for that matter.
zackers 6 months ago
go fuck a goat, eco idiots
RafaelWendling 6 months ago
Comment removed
RafaelWendling 6 months ago
So instead of targeting, say, Dodge or similar, they target the car maker with the most fuel efficient small-medium car in the world, who sell more cars that use less than 7L/100km than most other brands, and they honestly think cars do ANYTHING to cause damage to the environment when compared to countries like India and China, who they could target with an ad campaign to put pressure on.
Idiot.s
damstachizz 6 months ago
you do realize that VW's hardly make any CO2, they burn so little gas because their engines are tiny and efficient. And making one and running it for an entire lifetime will never cause as much environmental damage as it does to make a damn Prius
andyweuling 6 months ago
Then they wonder why EVERYONE hates Greenpeace.
jimmybrite 6 months ago
@jimmybrite They sure rub a lot of people the wrong way which doesn't really help when you're trying to convince them of something.
TheLogicalError 5 months ago
Noone can stop the Volkswagen.
JudenGaming 6 months ago
So the VW commercial uses a Passat, yet these idiots use a Jetta...
Ikey3125 6 months ago
dear Greenpeace, you can make the earth more green by stop using computers and electronics or even better, you live like the stone age! or should Colonel Kilgore help you to get back to the stone age?
14jamalk 6 months ago
This is ignorant. Most VW vehicles run on diesel which is much more efficient and clean burning than regular gasoline engines.
MrFeelingAwesome 6 months ago
@MrFeelingAwesome You obviously don't know anything about internal combustion engines! Diesels are far, far dirtier than petrols. Diesel Particulate Filters in the exhausts help a massive amount, but they are very troublesome for mechanics (guess how I know!).
Ayrshore 5 months ago
@Ayrshore Well, you must be a shitty mechanic. Several trustworthy sources have outright said that Diesel engines are generally more fuel efficient because diesel contains more energy per gallon than gasoline.
MrFeelingAwesome 5 months ago
@MrFeelingAwesome I didn't say they weren't more fuel efficient. I said they were dirtier.
What comes out of the exhaust of a diesel vehicle is much more polluting than what comes out of the exhaust of a petrol vehicle.
Until you add a DPF, which is a very expensive and troublesome piece of kit.
Ayrshore 5 months ago
Seriously greenpeace just die, people won't stay ignorant to your bullshit forever
weza74 6 months ago
Grenepeace is the most useless institution of the World, go save some Wales but don't Spam such crap on Youtube.
Indolf82 6 months ago
Pretty sure VW Makes the most fuel-efficient cars on the planet. This makes sense. I guess GreenPeace is still all like "Y U NO USE ELECTRIC?!", still not aware that electric cars use the same amount of fossil fuels.
Crpsheep 6 months ago
Yet, VW produces some of the cleanest diesel vehicles on earth. Green Peace phail!
GunsOfThePhoenix 6 months ago 8
@GunsOfThePhoenix Yeah, it's not the best of targets for Greenpeace to pick to spread their message. But I suppose they think all car manufacturers are 'the enemy', which I suppose is true for them to a certain degree.
TheLogicalError 5 months ago
i hate greenpeace, PETA, ALF and any other group that makes my life miserable i got 3 of my videos taken down because i didn't put the stupid disclaimer that no animals were harmed in the making of this film Fuck them All, i want to publicly go and shoot hamsters skeet style
The979970 6 months ago
Greenpeace..just like all the other phony eco-sites..keeps their people in fat city by preying on the ignorant.
CO2 scares are the Criminal Element..look at the jobs its costing...anyone but those making these idiotic ads!
rlaceybeef 6 months ago
Now that's what I call hypocrisy... I'm caring about our planet's future too, but playing Don Quijote doesn't give them credibility.
VikingMcFly 6 months ago
R32 FTW!
BARROW1989 6 months ago 7
I've been in a dilemma about what car I should purchase, Golf gti, evo abarth or a mini S. After seeing this, I'm so going for the VW golf, eat that hippy faggots.
Cilurzon 6 months ago
VW and Audi suck with their clean 2l Diesels. I'll make sure that I buy next time one of these 7l gasoline Engines from Ford, GM or some other American Company. I just want to help the world! :D
Olaf16 6 months ago
I like buying things Greenpeace hates. Think my next car should be a VW.
klarusboy 6 months ago
This is one of the dumbest piece of shits i have ever seen... George Lucas should sue them.
supajfuckyou 6 months ago
Fuck greenpeace
nik282000 6 months ago
yoda is talllll :o or eeryone is short :/
nyipnyop 7 months ago
lets load all the Greenpeace fuckwits onto a Mon Calamarian cruiser and THEN use the death star on them.
s0052701 7 months ago
Comment removed
GiacomoGaroffolo 7 months ago
VW is one all the companies that have some of the most durable and gas efficency cars in the market and that's all that matter right now
Hail VW!!!!
fredyriptor 7 months ago
Yes, Volkswagen too is destroying Mars with his fucking pollution ¬¬ come on, stop them! first the USA cars
Darken0927 7 months ago
asda
iplor2 7 months ago
after seen a whole marathon of star wars this was very funny
TheMilesEdgeworth 7 months ago
Come join you
99ulas 7 months ago
Please ignore the efficiency of VW engines behind the curtain. Everything is black and white... except Greenpeace... which is magically um... ideologically blinded.
realityhack 7 months ago
thiiiisss is too cool !!!!
gsterwesker310 7 months ago
Ha guys who cares about the meaning of the advert " The kids are all great"!!!!!!!
gerladiant 7 months ago
i like monkeys
SubscribeFloen 7 months ago
One of the main purposes of a parody is to provoke thought and discussion and although the content is a little too far reaching and jumbled to be effective, the fact that Lucas got his panties in a wad and is trying to shut it down, validates the video.
VegasMarcMarc 7 months ago 2
so.....vader used the death star to blow up the planet he was currently on? Smart....
mufff03 7 months ago
watch?v=4zH09a57z2I
Theaverable 7 months ago
Greenpeace mafia yeah
sergwy 7 months ago
I have shared
MaryGreeley 7 months ago
Смешно =)
drmidiv 8 months ago
I bet Greenpeace couldn't make a space station that cool. Go VW!
sunonthewindow 8 months ago
Great ad for VW! Good Job! :D
EVERYONE BUY A VW! That's what I learned from this video! :)
alaskanthunder 8 months ago 2
Greenpeace suxx!
slapsh 8 months ago
Pity on you @WillShakespeare2007... it's not about population levels or whatsoever! Neither is the price of cars.
It's just the need of wise resource usage. When the industries oppose regulations for their own profit, they are screwing the planet with unneccessary waste.
It's just stupid to think people are gonna to get rid of cars... it's just a fair requirement to industry: behave properly!
aalliieenn99 8 months ago
@aalliieenn99 anyone who believes we can just continue to grow the population of this planet has problems dealing with reality..where does the food come from??more farming? pushing more species from their homes for farmland.oceans are overfished to feed the population we have..forests can barely keep up with the needs of the wealthy 10% of the planet...where do the other 90% fit in...don't they get a piece of the dream?...you can't have it both ways....we have the resources or we don't..
fupabox 7 months ago 3
@fupabox indeed. I agree with every word from you. Don't misjudge me.
I am sure the current resource usage and population rising are insustainable for this planet. But that is another story.
aalliieenn99 7 months ago
@aalliieenn99 you are dead right..but the "other story" is the one that is ignored...and that...not some evil CO2 junk science video by green peace is going to change anything for the better. ...VW engineers have rightly decided that CO2 is NOT a threat to the planet..NOT..I applaud them for not joining the other sheep....science is supposed to trump theory..yet somehow the THEORY or global warming has won out...theory is the seed of science not fruit...it is to open discussion/debate not end it
fupabox 7 months ago 9
I also was pointing out to @WillShakespeare2007 that this video in particular is not demanding halt on the production of cars, neither does greenpeace demand that... It's all about fair trade. They lobby against regulations - which could threaten their profit - becomes more nasty when they show themself up to consumers as a company concerned about the environment.
aalliieenn99 7 months ago
"Delete me, and I will become more powerful than you can possibly imagine."
ROFLMAO, that's as funny as the commercial, Andy!
I don't always agree with Greenpeace's philosophy, but they hit the jackpot with this.
Our local paper in Chattanooga,TN ran an article about these commercials this morning, so everybody knows to come online and find this.
I predict a new viral hit.
belgarathmth 8 months ago
"Join Greenpeace and help us pay towards the new £15m diesel-powered yacht we just had built, which launches this Sunday."
Hope the French blow it up again...
Ayrshore 8 months ago
Hey look, children everywhere in this video. I bet none of you have ever driven a fucking car neverless bought a wolksvagen. Go back to your basements cunt dwellers and read more Fox News shit about globar warming. You know its ONLY supported by every major organization in the world, if the Tea Party says it doesnt exists it must NOT obviously.
krasusboy 8 months ago
@krasusboy Sarcasm doesn't help here.
TheLogicalError 5 months ago
Watching this makes me want a Volkswagen. So yeah.......
MJFV1 8 months ago
I like my second hand Golf. I reckon it's a lot better than buying a new Prius chock full of lithium batteries. And it will probably run for 200,000 miles. And Greenpeace are boring. But still, come on, this is funny.
fattyvideo 8 months ago
fuck you shitpeace
kuibaaaaaa 8 months ago
For the last 30 years I've owned several cars......most of them VW/Audi......after seeing this I'll make sure I keep buying them......
TheOriginalPristle 8 months ago 47
@TheOriginalPristle Sounds good to me. I think I'll put an anti-greenpeace sticker on the back of my VW :)
thedarkone2134 6 months ago
VW FTW, screw the planet!
NZMk2VR6 8 months ago
I'm pretty fuckin sure that andy gates and a lot of freaking people at greenpeace still uses gasoline cars, or do they drive a bike to go to work or walk, perhaps they walk instead of drive when they go to vacations.
yzaluka 8 months ago 2
@yzaluka Im sure you are right, but if more affordable more eco friendly options were available that would all change. take a look at the report on "vwdarkside" its an interesting read.
even just look at the key facts on page 3
malehippie 8 months ago
@yzaluka Your analysis is too simple and silly, classic
elevete 7 months ago
LulzSec ?
ewamdrw 8 months ago
that was epic all the way up to the end. you make everything fail greenpeace
TheDave328 8 months ago
congratulations !!! Andy Gates
Greenpeace forever !!!
Thanks Gp.
joferogo 8 months ago
#lol
caco237 8 months ago
greenpeace is so lost it's founders bailed on them......CO2 is the food for a green planet...without it we all die.....
fupabox 8 months ago
@fupabox But as with anything, too much of it is as bad as too little or none of it
Exildeutscher 8 months ago
@Exildeutscher correct....and we have NO CLUE as to what too much or too little is...monkeying with things we don't understand is never a good idea....basing an entire world economy on unproven science is just as bad. Google new ice age coming, and see just how little we understand
fupabox 8 months ago 2
@fupabox Also correct but surely by mindlessly blowing Co2 into the atmosphere we are destined to hit the too much mark sooner or later. Now don't get me wrong, I'm by no means a full on environmentalist but as I said, or rather implied, in my previous message, it's all about moderation.
Exildeutscher 8 months ago
@fupabox
New ice age? What happened to 'Global Warming'? Oh, that's right, it became 'Climate Change' when it was revealed to be a fraud.
Ayrshore 8 months ago
@Ayrshore How about you learn some facts and then post? "Climate change" is a process that describes - guess what - climate change; global warming describes a small part of it that's become evident in the last 100 years.
A person who *wants* to know the *facts* just needs to google; try "global warming wiki" and "climate change wiki". Info is there if you want to find it.
HomoCyberneticus 8 months ago
@HomoCyberneticus The last 100 years? Climate Change has been going on forever. Literally.
The planet gets warmer, then it gets colder, then it gets warmer again. Ice Age anyone?
It's a natural thing, get used to it. The dinosaurs died out, we probably will too someday. The planet will survive.
Ayrshore 8 months ago
@Ayrshore Yes, climate has changed over time. But these cycles are well understood and that's not what's going on right now. Solar output is not changing much, in fact until very recently it was decreasing. All measured by NASA satellites pointed at the sun. During all this time the earth was getting warmer.
TheLogicalError 5 months ago
@TheLogicalError How can we "well understand" something that happened in the past, when we couldn't see it and had no way of measuring it. It was a 'best guess', that's all.
Ayrshore 5 months ago
@Ayrshore We -do- have ways to measuring things in the past, and we've been measuring by hand for almost 2 centuries. Just because you do not understand how this is possible, doesn't make it impossible. The global warming theory didn't just drop out of the air, it's almost a hundred years old! And the scientific 'debate' had already settled on this in the late 1970's!
TheLogicalError 5 months ago
@HomoCyberneticus "MAN MADE GLOBAL WARMING IS NOT A FACT" when are people going to get it through their heads...it is a THEORY!!!!......unproven,hotly debated by environmental scientists,and at the moment nothing more than a political stance.....argue it til you are blue in the face...it doesn't make it true
fupabox 7 months ago 2
@fupabox So is the theory of relativity, or the theory of plate tectonics. Just because it's a 'theory' doesn't mean you can just safely ignore it. It just means you misunderstood the scientific process. ALL science is theory. ALL science is a best guess. If you think that science can be 100% sure about anything, you misunderstood the scientific process once again. And it's only 'hotly debated' among amateurs, not among the people who actually work on this kind of stuff full-time.
TheLogicalError 5 months ago
@TheLogicalError ALL science is theory? Go back to bed.
Ayrshore 5 months ago
@Ayrshore Yes, all science -is- theory. The way it basically works is that you come up with a theory, and everybody tries to disprove it. And it'll remain standing until a better theory comes along. That's how you get closer and closer to truth. It's basically applying evolution to ideas.
TheLogicalError 5 months ago
@TheLogicalError So you admit that evolution isn't just a theory then?
Ayrshore 5 months ago
@Ayrshore Biological evolution is a theory. Evolution as a mechanism is not.
TheLogicalError 5 months ago
@TheLogicalError the use of the word evolution is misleading as it posits a choice in physiological change..the correct term is advantageous mutation ..IE. a change in physiological or biological make-up that results in a net benefit for the mutated organism..this mutation being advantageous, trumps the current form and over time becomes the norm
fupabox 5 months ago
@TheLogicalError unfortunately ideals and agendas often get in the way..especially if the masses have become convinced and are willing to back it with their wallets...when governments open chequebooks to those supporting man-made global warming it isn't hard to see what side some researchers will take.. what is the harm in reducing pollution under the guise of "global warming"? it has pushed creativity and new avenues of thought..for that it is a positive..closing all debate is however is not!
fupabox 5 months ago
@fupabox What's going on in the public arena is not a debate. It's propaganda. The same invalid points are repeating over and over again even though they've been debunked long ago and it's the goal of some people to make GW to look as if it's invalid. As for your remark towards research money, how many millionaire scientists do you know? These are just classic character assassination techniques. Don't like the message or messenger? Kill the messenger.
TheLogicalError 5 months ago
@TheLogicalError And I say it is the point of some to make GW appear valid..which invalid points are you referring to? The ones touted by Al Gore the godfather of the GW mania?..the work of fiction he released under the guise of a documentary? Did I at any time make mention of "millionaire scientists"?..researchers follow the grant money..it feeds their families and who can blame them...too many people choose a position and only read arguments that support that position..that's faith not science
fupabox 5 months ago
@fupabox Al gore is not "the godfather of the GW mania" and definitely stretched the truth on some things, which didn't really help the case of those who are genuinely trying to educate people about GW. The points I'm refering to are numerous, one often brought up point is the warming in medieval times, which has been debunked long ago. Considering the hostility from some very powerful (and rich) institutions against GW, a scientist would easily earn much more by proving that GW is false.
TheLogicalError 5 months ago
@TheLogicalError I am open to the possibility that man-made global warming my indeed be true...are you open the fact that it may be a lie??
fupabox 5 months ago
@fupabox Yes I am, but at the moment all evidence (and there's a lot of it) points to the contrary. So my best guess is that it's indeed very real. I'd actually be thrilled if it turned out to be false.
TheLogicalError 5 months ago
@TheLogicalError I can assume we agree to dis-agree..but the debate is enjoyable and necessary if the truth is to be found..there are motivations on both sides of the argument that are not wholly about finding the truth..I too hope that it turns out to be a false alarm,but keep my mind open..
fupabox 5 months ago
@TheLogicalError All science is not theory...water boils at 212 degrees with variations for barometric pressure...that is NOT theory...the moon is approx. 250k miles from the earth give or take ,again with certain variable...a measurable fact..we did not get lucky and and have 12 different men walk on the moon's surface on a theory...it was math and physics..sciences not theories...E=MC2 is theory ..2 NO + O2 → 2 NO2 is nitrogen dioxide...fact,not theory
fupabox 5 months ago
@fupabox I'm sorry but you're a bit confused here. In science, a "theory" is not some loose unconfirmed guess. A scientific theory is not a hypothesis. A scientific theory is a hypothesis that has been confirmed to accurately match and predict reality.
Gravity for instance is a scientific theory. Water boiling at 100 degrees C is a scientific theory. E=mc^2 is a scientific theory, and it is accurate: it's where nuclear power plants get their energy from.
mkarnerfors 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@fupabox When John and Jane Doe say "I have a theory", the scientist says "I have a hypothesis". Then John and Jane say "This is fact", the scientist says "This is the current theory and model".
A scientific theory *is* what we in everyday speech call "fact".
mkarnerfors 2 months ago
@mkarnerfors whether you call it "theory" or hypothesis" man made global warming is still unproven....when someone argues semantics it usually means they have lost the debate and are resorting to diversion.
fupabox 2 months ago
@fupabox No, it is not unproven. Apart from a very vocal minority - that are pretty much akin to teenagers with authority issues - the consensus is that AGW is proven.
mkarnerfors 2 months ago
@fupabox So either it's a cycle that we cannot change and we all die, or it's something that we can change. Let's make it so both possible ways ensure our demise. Is that what you're saying?
kungguld 2 months ago
@kungguld Not at all..cleaning the environment and reducing pollution is what we should be doing..being environmentally aware is just good stewardship of our planet.But bowing to and basing policy on the unproven MMGW ,and attacking anyone not in lock-step with the theory is wrong. It brings about stupid legislation such as banning incandescent bulbs and replacing them with dangerous CFLs...action for the sake of action is neither intelligent or helpful
fupabox 2 months ago
Comment removed
mkarnerfors 2 months ago
@Ayrshore All science is theory... yes.
A scientific theory is not a random unconfirmed guess. That is instead call "a hypothesis". Once the hypothesis is confirmed to match reality and accurately predict reality, it's called a "scientific theory".
Gravity is a scientific theory. Evolution is a scientific theory. AGW is a scientific theory. All of them have been confirmed and validated against reality.
mkarnerfors 2 months ago
@mkarnerfors "All of them have been confirmed and validated against reality. "
Global Warming directly opposes reality though. What is actually happening now goes against everything the green movement has said will happen for the last 20 years.
Ayrshore 2 months ago
@Ayrshore Another matter: scientist are now insisting on "climate change" because of the public, aka idiots who just wait for a cold weather front to come so they could gloat "Where's your global warming now?". Scientists admit the choice of name for the phenomenon is a bad one.
It doesn't have to get warm in your phreaking part of the planet to be true. Last time I checked, you share it with some 7 billion other humans - how about you start thinking of others as well?
HomoCyberneticus 8 months ago
@HomoCyberneticus I do think of the others. I think they shouldn't have to put up with Greenpeace's scaremonging bullshit.
Ayrshore 8 months ago
@HomoCyberneticus they insist on using "climate change" but it can be used truthfully in a sentence....NOTE!! "manmade climate change" is not part of the current lexicon......because there is no proof.....believe what you wish ,but stop trying to force it on others and insulting anyone who dis-agrees...insult is not debate..
fupabox 7 months ago
@fupabox Actually there is proof .. a lot of proof .. but you probably didn't take a chemistry class .. or you just didn't look over facts .. cause it's there .. all there. Now the results of us recarbonizing the atmosphere are still unknown - but we're definitely warming the planet.
VegasMarcMarc 7 months ago
@VegasMarcMarc thousands of climatologists split down the middle on this argument is hardly overwhelming proof....
fupabox 7 months ago
@fupabox climatologists are not "split down the middle" on this topic. The vast majority believes that climate change is real and that it's man made. In fact, you'd probably be hard pressed to find any group of people to agree on anything in the percentages that climatologists agree on climate change.
TheLogicalError 5 months ago
@TheLogicalError The number of climatologists being churned out of universities since the GW issue came to the fore has risen exponentially...of course many of them are going to be on the side of Man made global warming..it justifies the diploma they just received and ensures funding ..ergo ..jobs in their chosen profession..not at all conclusive proof of a theory.
fupabox 5 months ago
@fupabox That sounds like you believe it's just one big conspiracy. Couldn't it simply be that these students believe this because when presented with all the knowledge and evidence that it's simply the most logical explanation? Or do you believe these students aren't capable of thinking for themselves? As I mentioned before, there's more money to be made for a scientist to disprove GW than the reverse.
TheLogicalError 5 months ago
@TheLogicalError Having been to university I can assuredly say that a students opinion in most cases is that of the professor who is teaching the course. In most cases there is very little room for debate if you wish to graduate..It is not conspiracy ,but merely necessity...students in climate science classes these days are there because for the most part they believe in man-made GW..the course will confirm that notion because it is the founding reason for many of these courses..inter in a orbis
fupabox 5 months ago
@HomoCyberneticus 'global' is not 'local'. Global warming means that the whole earth as a whole gets warmer. But local weather is a different beast entirely. Local weather is far less predictable. Did you know, for instance, that during the last cold winter in the USA that in the Philippines the temperatures hit record highs?
TheLogicalError 5 months ago
@TheLogicalError That would be something called BALANCE. If one place has a record low, and another has a record high - then the average is more or less maintained!
Ayrshore 5 months ago
@Ayrshore You make 2 false assumptions here. First of all, these 2 events are not the only things that happened in that period, second of all, you assume all these events balance each other out; they do not.
TheLogicalError 5 months ago
@HomoCyberneticus Climate change is a natural thing. It has been about for many hundreds of thousands of years. It's got nothing to do with cars, or VW.
Ayrshore 2 months ago
@Ayrshore Yeah and there are those that say we didn't go to the moon either. Go bark up someone else's tree.
mkarnerfors 2 months ago
@fupabox There where some papers in the 1970's with theories that we where on the verge of a new ice age. The media picked up on these big time, even though the majority of papers at the time supported that the planet was warming instead. The ice age theories have long since been debunked. But somehow this idea that "scientists thought an ice age was coming" stuck.
TheLogicalError 5 months ago
Nice video, but seriously:
FUCK YOU GREENPEACE.
Ayrshore 8 months ago
@Ayrshore fuck Volkswagen and you
leochacha 8 months ago
@Ayrshore - Oh yes right because Greenpeace are what's wrong with the world by drawing attention to the destruction of the rain forests, depletion of ocean life and protecting endangered wildlife - yes fuck them! How dare they give a fuck about the planet.
WillShakespeare2007 8 months ago
@WillShakespeare2007 Greenpeace do stupid scaremonging and scapegoating - VW's most economic models are more expensive because they are MORE EXPENSIVE TO MAKE!
Same as how Greenpeace spent decades campaining against nuclear power, and now one of their former leaders says they got it wrong, nuclear is the way forward.
Greenpeace say we need to stop depending on oil, yet what does Rainbow Warrior 2 and all of their RIB's run on?
Hippocrites, that's all Greenpeace are.
Ayrshore 8 months ago
@WillShakespeare2007 If they gave a damn about the planet they would discuss birthrates and unsustainable population levels
fupabox 8 months ago 2
@fupabox Kid, you can't do everything at once. They are doing their bit, are you?
gogledoessuck 7 months ago
@fupabox True, population levels is one of the biggest problems in the world.
TheLogicalError 5 months ago
@TheLogicalError on that we most certainly can agree
fupabox 5 months ago
huauhahua Muito bom!
ravicaju 8 months ago
Ainda bem que o vídeo sobreviveu!
michelepercivalli 8 months ago
Não acredito que tiraram o canal do Greenpeace do ar!!!!!!
michelepercivalli 8 months ago