"Club Penton" - Ask questions to Hollywood insider "Penton-Man"

[Jeff Kleist]

And all of them are lobbyists and shills for the energy industry

Dr. Timothy Ball is Chairman and Chair of the Scientific Advisory Committee of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project (NRSP).[1] ]Two of the three directors of the NRSP - Timothy Egan and Julio Lagos - are executives with the PR and lobbying company, the High Park Group (HPG).[2] Both HPG and Egan and Lagos work for energy industry clients and companies on energy policy.[3]Ball is a Canadian climate change skeptic and was previously a "scientific advisor" to the oil industry-backed organization, Friends of Science.[4] Ball is a member of the Board of Research Advisors of the Frontier Centre for Public Policy, a Canadian free-market think tank which is predominantly funded by foundations and corporations.[5][/b]

* Vincent R. Gray, coal chemist, founder of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition:[/b] "The two main 'scientific' claims of the IPCC are the claim that 'the globe is warming' and 'Increases in carbon dioxide emissions are responsible'. Evidence for both of these claims is fatally flawed."[9]

Bob Carter is a Research Professor at James Cook University (Queensland) and the University of Adelaide (South Australia). He is a palaeontologist, stratigrapher and marine geologist of more than thirty years professional experience, and holds degrees from the University of Otago (New Zealand) and the University of Cambridge (England). *snip* Chair of the national Marine Science and Technologies Committee, Director of the Australian Office of the Ocean Drilling Program, and Co-Chief Scientist on ODP Leg 181 (Southwest Pacific Gateways).

Find me people without ties to the energy industry, who have more credibility than Amir.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

Now, back on topic, Penton - did you end up seeing this?

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/a_serious_man/

I was curious what you thought - I've been a couple times now, and think it's an absolute work of genius (with the subburban banality gorgeously shot by forum fave Deakins, back in the DOP seat). I think Variety nailed it when they suggested it's the type of film you make when you win an Oscar... I'm going to take that as a complimentary comment.

Extracted from the fact that it's made next to no money, I think it's a future classic with a wit drier than a Minneapolis winter's eve.

Your thoughts?

No, I haven’t seen it but, the trailer looks funny (i.e. ‘the rabbi is thinking’).

[DenonCI]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

And all of them are lobbyists and shills for the energy industry

Find me people without ties to the energy industry, who have more credibility than Amir.

Jeff,

Using that logic, find me one person who thinks global warming is happening that isn't on the government dole for funding their research about global warming and doesn't have a vested interest or makes money off of the claim that it's being caused by humans.

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Cinema Squid

Hopefully this is an appropriate place to ask a Sony-related audio question...

What's the story with the recent appearance of 96kHz sample rate audio tracks that are now popping up? If I am not mistaken both Léon and sex, lies and videotape released this week have these (I'll be able to check Léon myself tomorrow when I get my copy from AMZ).

Not that I'm complaining mind you, just seems a bit excessive and odd.....

Do you like it?
I find it odd that this is the first question which I have received about Léon, now that it has streeted, rather than queries about the picture quality esp. in regards to any increased brightness compared to previous home media incarnations.

P.S.
On another note, examine how your sub(s) sound at the very beginning of the motion picture. If the wooden floor doesn’t vibrate, then might I suggest you either upgrade or calibrate as this phenomenon was quite evident in my home theater with two quality powered subs running thru a Behringer Feedback Destroyer Pro……haven’t tried the disc out yet in the room with the four subs.

[DenonCI]

Jeff,

Give this a read: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124597505076157449.html

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by HeavyHitter

I guess they figure when all else fails, time to go back to the old playbook.

When I think of the one person, who harassed and I mean harassed both paidgeek and Talkstr8t more than anyone else on the internet, it was not Amir, it was rdjam without a doubt.
https://forum.blu-ray.com/showpost.p...postcount=1826

At the very minimum, he should have to do an internet perp walk……..which, I doubt ever happened.

[DenonCI]

Between global warming and a rehash of the format war/AVS I can't get any work done!

[Penton-Man]

Originally Posted by Slec

Am I missing the film all this climatology discussion is associated with? Consensus or none, let's let this thread get back to what it does best.

Yeah, you guys get too carried away with this climate change stuff.
Personally, I’m in agreement with Jeff, I think, as the comments have been raging fast and furious and I’ve only skimmed them. In other words, the polar ice IS melting at an alarming rate. I love polar bears and the way things are going, these critters are doomed.
And if I live long enough, Newport Beach will be underwater with something like Culver City being beachfront property.

Perhaps a few more back and forth climate change comments to clarify each other's point(s) and then let's end that discussion by noon P.S.T.

Then you all can munch on some movie popcorn for awhile……….
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540...37181#34037181

[Deciazulado]

Originally Posted by Slec

Am I missing the film all this climatology discussion is associated with? Consensus or none, let's let this thread get back to what it does best.

?

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Jeff Kleist

And all of them are lobbyists and shills for the energy industry







Find me people without ties to the energy industry, who have more credibility than Amir.

You quoted three people out of how many listed? Many are from various universities and with climate backgrounds. Everyone on there is not a lobbyist or energy shill.

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Deciazulado

?

I spent much of yesterday wanting to kill my clients, so I went and saw 2012. Good for Sony to be making lots of money, it's an offensively awesome anti intellectual masterpiece. When the Volcano blows, you'd think it'd cause massive cooling. But it didn't, not because of the accuracy of the climatological model employed, but because the film above had already been made with the same premise. Stuff blow up real good, but it stayed warm (then, well, wet.) Go figure...

Anyhoo, thought you'd find this article amusing (from a "right wing" national paper no less) as it ties directly to our forum at hand:

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/b...n1-reason.aspx

I freely admit to not having expertise in this complex area, but I think I do have expertise in judging who does.... I trust their opinion, which is based on experimental evidence, over...various graduates of the University of Google, for whom evidence-based [facts are] a foreign concept.

(minor contextual editing to make it seem more topical to this thread )


Meanwhile, he's the Rand-ian take from the same paper:

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/b...-vaccines.aspx

[Jeff Kleist]

Agreed Penton

Using that logic, find me one person who thinks global warming is happening that isn't on the government dole for funding their research about global warming and doesn't have a vested interest or makes money off of the claim that it's being caused by humans.

Not a single one of these people is involved in any way in climate science either. They are as unqualified as a zoologist doing quantum physics. These people are not doing research on global warming. They're doing research on new pockets of coal and oil.

And no, there are plenty of people doing science every day not on the government payroll. Typically they don't work in industries who believe they will see direct financial harm and dump millions of dollars into stopping climate change legislation. So since they are a- unqualified, holding no degrees in the relevant field,b- have severely screaming conflict of interest, and c- have no peer-reviewed published work on the matter (published in reputable scientific journals) their opinions are worth exactly zero when it comes to determining scientific truth.

At the very minimum, he should have to do an internet perp walk……..which, I doubt ever happened.

By the looks of things, RDJam is sitting back counting his cash and onto the next viral marketing plant. Notice how he vanished just long enough after HD DVD died that he could orchestrate a non-directly connected retreat?

[HeavyHitter]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Yeah, you guys get too carried away with this climate change stuff.
Personally, I’m in agreement with Jeff, I think, as the comments have been raging fast and furious and I’ve only skimmed them. In other words, the polar ice IS melting at an alarming rate. I love polar bears and the way things are going, these critters are doomed.

The ice caps have been melting on Mars too. This was reported some time back (not without debate, of course).

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...s-warming.html

[Sponge-worthy]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Perhaps a few more back and forth climate change comments to clarify each other's point(s) and then let's end that discussion by noon P.S.T.

Good call Penton. I would add that the international environmental treaties dealing with such issues as acid rain, CFCs, and oceanic concerns all came as a result of findings by the oft cited "international scientific community." In those cases, there was not the vitriol, the resistance, the partisanship, nor the claims of a 'hoax.' In part, those changes required relatively small changes in industrial output to correct, so the political will was there to make it happen...nation to nation.

Now, the international scientific recommendations to scale back on carbon dioxide output have been with us for about 20 years. The difference here is that, unlike a narrow, somewhat easily correctible factor such as CFCs, CO2 output involves very systemic issues of energy (coal), farming, and nearly all sectors of industry. The economic impact of a massive reduction in CO2 output would be huge--particularly for coal-rich nations like the U.S. or rapidly developing nations such as India, China, Indonesia, etc. So, unlike the former examples, the desire to control carbon is met with much more widespread resistance. The science has been pretty solid for many years on the actual existence of climate change, it's just that we're rather lost in the cost-benefit analysis of actually doing something about it. This ends up devolving into lots of lay folks arguing over this expert or that expert...or which "science" is better. When really, I don't think the "science" part of it is really at issue at this point in time.

Thanks. I'm done.

[john_1958]

Originally Posted by abintra

If it wasn't for lobbyists and government subsidiaries, nuclear power wouldn't draw nearly as much interest in comparison to other alternatives (and doesn't from the private sector).

whatever happened to laser reactors?
https://lasers.llnl.gov/science_tech...xperiments.php
http://www.medindia.net/news/Now-Nuc...or-52233-1.htm
image

or solar stations http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/ene...-in-space.html

[KubrickFan]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

To the best of my knowledge, there was indeed a policy change (i.e. all subtitles in the active picture all the time) as reflected in the final poll results.

I haven’t been following that subject so, I’m uncertain as to exactly when the new policy was to become effective and (due to a natural encoding/authoring lag time), when consumers would actually start to see new Blu-ray product reflecting that change.

Don’t quote me, but off the top of my head, I would say Dec. or Jan.
Give me some time to look into the situation, as I’m working double-time this week so that I don’t have to come into the office at all, next week (Thanksgiving).

Penton, do you know that the subs themselves will be smaller as well? Placing them in the active frame is very nice, but fonts this big would only be distracting, I think.

[sharkshark]

Originally Posted by Penton-Man

Then you all can munch on some movie popcorn for awhile……….
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540...37181#34037181

I go to enough films that I tend not to actually eat during them (did get a free small popcorn at AMC yesterday, I must admit), but what that report neglects to mention is that the theatres are driven =entirely= by concession sales in order to make a profit...

[Jeff Kleist]

Khabibullo Abdusamatov-mathematician and astronomer, unqualified

Sallie Baliunas- astrophysicist, unqualified, lobbyist at the George C Marshall Institute who lobbies for Exxon-Mobil

More recently, the Institute has focused on disputing mainstream scientific opinion on climate change. Funded by ExxonMobil and chaired by a former official of the American Petroleum Institute, the George C. Marshall Institute has been described by the Union of Concerned Scientists as a "clearinghouse for global warming contrarians",[1] and by Newsweek as a "central cog in the denial machine."

George V. Chilingar, Professor of Civil and Petroleum Engineering at the University of Southern California. Unqualified, obvious oil connections

Ian Clark- hydrogeologist. Unqualified, but works in petroleum related field (movement of water and other liquids through the ground)

David H Douglass- study financed by the Heartland Institute, a Tobacco lobbying company (among other things) who still denies the effects of second hand smoke. While they illegally refuse to disclose their donors (501c3 organizations are required to make them public), they're obviously on the take from the oil companies by the content of their website. They are confirmed to have received close to $700,000 from Exxon prior to them hiding their donors.

Don J Easterbrook- Geologist- unqualified for the atmospheric science he's touting

William H Gray- Qualified, but his denials seem more tied to his conspiracy theories about world government than anything else. An overview of his claims here- http://www.realclimate.org/index.php...4/gray-on-agw/

Tad Murty-geologist, Fraser Institute who are tobacco lobbyists, and has taken money from Exxon specifically for climate change lobbying

Do I really need to go on? All of this came from clicking their names on the list or a fast Google.

whatever happened to laser reactors?

Brian Cox did an awesome thing on laser and plasma reactors in a BBC special awhile back. I'll see if I can find the title. Long story short, lot of promise, but they haven't got it working yet. We're 20-30 years away from practical installations, assuming they meet their goals

So the moral of the story is to always check the qualifications and motivations of anyone you're taking advice from, and weigh those against what they're saying, and never trust anyone who works for a political think tank/institute to tell you the truth about whether your shoe's untied

[SquidPuppet]

Originally Posted by sharkshark

I go to enough films that I tend not to actually eat during them (did get a free small popcorn at AMC yesterday, I must admit), but what that report neglects to mention is that the theatres are driven =entirely= by concession sales in order to make a profit...

Even more reason to switch from coconut oil to peanut or canola.

[Alan Gordon]

Originally Posted by ryan69969

This ends up devolving into lots of lay folks arguing over this expert or that expert...or which "science" is better. When really, I don't think the "science" part of it is really at issue at this point in time.

I credit Al Gore with making more people aware of the issue. Unfortunately, his involvement was a double-edged sword. Sure, more people became aware of the problem, but it, unfortunately caused an even bigger political divide to the issue. Living in the South, the issue is pretty much looked upon with disdain, and is generally followed by an Al Gore joke as if he "created" it (yes, that gives one big hint as to what kind of jokes are often used).

Most often than not, people's belief in Global Warming is dependent upon their political beliefs... which is a very sad commentary about US citizens' state of mind.

Quite frankly, I don't care if people believe in Global Warming or not, but I do believe that any effort to make the world cleaner and healthier (whether it be for belief in Global Warming, monetary issues, religous beliefs, etc) should be looked upon with praise rather than scorn and ridicule.

~Alan<~~~~~~~In just before the buzzer.... or not...