good back-story, and good acting

A brilliant film that helped define a genre

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

Even the UN's climate change chief, Rajendra Pachauri ( a man with a vested interest if ever there was one !) has had to acknowledge that until this year (2014) there had been NO rise in global temperature for the last 17 years….a period coinciding with an unprecedented expansion of CO2-emitting Power Stations in China and elsewhere.The evidence in the film "The Great Global Warming Swindle" is that climate has ALWAYS been changing, (for instance, it was much warmer in the Middle Ages than it is now), and that Climate Change is primarily due to processes in the Sun which impact (via the 'solar wind') on cloud-formation, and NOT human activity.CO2, man-made or otherwise, is NOT the driving force behind Climate Change now, and never has been in the past.We can probably all agree that pollution is not a particularly good idea, but on the other hand it is alarmist nonsense to suggest that we are all going to drown under melting ice-caps or something if we continue to burn stuff.The film also has important things to say on the origins of the "theory" of anthropogenic climate change… (think : Reagan and Thatcher)…, and its potential (or rather its AGENDA) to do great harm to economic development in the poorest regions of our planet.

I love pollution and don't care what I do to the environment, and when people see me littering or spraying pesticides, they shout at me and start their hippie lectures, it's highly pathetic and annoying. So I was trying to find a film that explained the other side of the global warming issue, and like this film says...There is no 'global warming issue!' Global warming is a natural cycle, not caused by man but on its own, and this film has the scientific data to back this up. Not only is it informative but it is also not biased the way Al Gore's 'an Inconvenient Truth' was. Decide for yourself which one you'd rather be; uninformed environmentalist hippie fighting for a cause that isn't there, or an educated individual who learns that there are two sides to every story. This is an excellent film and it deserves a 10/10.

I've been doing a lot of research on this matter. And even though more facts affirm global warming, this documentary was refreshing to me because I always appreciate different perspectives.My main point: It is a wrong idea that environmentalists are evil. I personally, don't care much if the earth is warming or cooling as these are long term effects. I'm more concerned about the present - I do want a clean earth and preservation of ecosystems for aesthetic and practical reasons. So global warming or not, it's the pollution I'm worried about which is irrefutable and overly apparent. Now I'm an engineer and a nature friendly guy. It's a wrong idea that we're against development. I do want development but I just want technology that doesn't pollute. Such technology is development and progression itself.Secondly the anti-Africa theory is apparently a valid point. But also it should be understood that there might not be any conspiracy at all. Maybe an underdeveloped Africa would just be a consequence if exploitation of oil and gas was to be stopped completely; but that doesn't necessarily mean that preventing development in Africa is a motive to the people behind this supposed global warming propaganda.

We always hear "save the environment" and see a lot of things promoting that message. this covers the other half of the story, or so I thought, it is why I watched it anyways. this while after the movie I was able to contradict, if they did not contradict themselves in the movie, almost everything that was said, or find flaws. without even talking about the information, the movie directing itself does have some minor flaws, for example we see the title about five time at the beginning. the thing is that not only was I able to contradict most of their information, which is formed on a scientific basis, but I don't even study science, I study theatre! My advice would be maybe to watch it if you are curious, but if you are looking for some ACTUAL research information, save you're self some time and skip this feature.