As chair for the UK's Joint Parliamentary Committee on the Draft Climate Change Bill, Lord David Puttnam has been a voice for raising awareness about issues affecting the environment. Now the film maker and Labour Party politician is looking to video games as a means to help educate people about dangers impacting the world's changing climate.
"Serious games based upon real-life geography should be vital tools in our fight against climate change," said Lord Puttnam in a statement, adding that "Educating people about the impact of prolonged changes to our climate in an accessible way is the best catalyst for action I know." Socially conscious games have enjoyed a wider spotlight in recent years, with developer Red Redemption specifically addressing climate-related topics in its serious games Operation: Climate Control and Climate Challenge. We imagine Lord Puttnam is hoping however to put the issue on a grander stage, as it's all fun and games until someone pokes a hole in the ozone. Oops, too late.
Reader Comments (34)
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 11:06AM (Unverified) said
Cue horde of people who don't believe in Global Warming and think it's a liberal scam or something, just because Al Gore was the figurehead for the US movement (see: Same idiots who don't believe in Evolution)
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 11:27AM (Unverified) said
Liberal scam? No, but are liberals taking advantage of Global Climate Change to fill their pockets? Yes. I mean just look at this stupid 'stimulus bill' if you don't believe that Libs just want to spend money regardless if its needed or not.
Also, did you really need to bring religion into this thread? -1 for you
Reply
Also, did you really need to bring religion into this thread? -1 for you
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 12:47PM GenBanks said
"are liberals taking advantage of Global Climate Change to fill their pockets? Yes. I mean just look at this stupid 'stimulus bill' if you don't believe that Libs just want to spend money regardless if its needed or not."
Oh and don't forget: 9/11 was an inside job, the moon landing was government-planned hoax, and Diana's death was a political assassination.
Reply
Oh and don't forget: 9/11 was an inside job, the moon landing was government-planned hoax, and Diana's death was a political assassination.
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 1:03PM mrmobius said
Yes, because everyone who doesn't believe in evolution are idiots?
I love that blanket statement. I could name many professors who do not believe evolution to be capable of holding the weight that naturalistic scientists place on it.
Get your head out of Darwin's ass and make your own mind, instead of following the statements of many people who either don't know enough to say otherwise, or follow pathways of logic that when examined are rubbish.
Reply
I love that blanket statement. I could name many professors who do not believe evolution to be capable of holding the weight that naturalistic scientists place on it.
Get your head out of Darwin's ass and make your own mind, instead of following the statements of many people who either don't know enough to say otherwise, or follow pathways of logic that when examined are rubbish.
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 4:42PM Magetto1 said
"I love that blanket statement. I could name many professors who do not believe evolution to be capable of holding the weight that naturalistic scientists place on it."
There's quite good reasons by Nauralistic Scientists place so much weight behind evolution.
Reply
There's quite good reasons by Nauralistic Scientists place so much weight behind evolution.
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 11:10AM (Unverified) said
OLD
He's forgetting "Captain Planet and The Planeteers" on the NES... from 19 years ago!
He's forgetting "Captain Planet and The Planeteers" on the NES... from 19 years ago!
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 11:33AM Rupee said
Global warming & evolution as an origin. If global warming is real, we'll all fry in 20 years even if we did curb emissions because of China and India... so who cares? And if evolution as an origin is real, then our great grandfather is the amoeba... so who cares?
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 11:34AM (Unverified) said
Great... Politics in video games...
Next Up:
Fox News the game: A third person action game where you go around making things up.
Al Gore 3: A first person game where you go around making things up
Michael Moore Action whore: a 8th person action game where you wobble around while making things up.
O'Reilly: O'rlly? Isometric strategy game where you go around making stuff up. And interrupting people while they talk.
Next Up:
Fox News the game: A third person action game where you go around making things up.
Al Gore 3: A first person game where you go around making things up
Michael Moore Action whore: a 8th person action game where you wobble around while making things up.
O'Reilly: O'rlly? Isometric strategy game where you go around making stuff up. And interrupting people while they talk.
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 3:56PM Vordus said
Ozone has no relation to global warming though, it's the depletion of the layer of atmosphere that catches most of the sun's UV rays... which... uh... cause sunburn and cancer? I think?
Why can I only remember the bits of science that involved making things explode with Bunsen burners?
Reply
Why can I only remember the bits of science that involved making things explode with Bunsen burners?
Posted: Feb 11th 2009 2:36AM (Unverified) said
Global warming isn't a political issue. It's a social issue. So, the same as the PSAs you saw in arcade games, this is an issue that certainly has a place in video games.
Reply
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 12:02PM (Unverified) said
Sorry Nicholas, "Global Warming" is out. The new term is "Climate Change". It's pretty much future-proof as it can cover anything (even the cooling cycle that we are now 10 years into)
The whole "Climate Change" scam starts with reports from the IPCC which if you take the time to read them don't definitively state ANYTHING. (if you took a sip of 3/2 beer every time you saw the words "if", "might", "could", "probably", "perhaps", "expected", or "projected" in one of those reports you would be dead of alcohol poisoning by the time you were half through it). Its simply assumptions built upon one another until the final analysis is a veritable lottery win if you get them all correct.
After the reports come out, the activists in the media, education, and the political class take the worst case scenarios from the reports, inflate them further and pass them of as FACT to the uninformed public. After which they attack the credibility of anyone that isn't in lock-step with them. Even the least skeptical person among us should have doubts about their motives.
"Climate Change" is something that happens. It always has and always will. We don't have the power to change it either way. To say otherwise is to be a desperate cool-aid drinker or to have a vested interest in promoting it.
BTW, as the 1998 cooling trend continues, more and more scientists are publicly coming out against the popular notion of AGW (anthropological global warming). They (wisely) don't want their reputations to go down with the ship.
The whole "Climate Change" scam starts with reports from the IPCC which if you take the time to read them don't definitively state ANYTHING. (if you took a sip of 3/2 beer every time you saw the words "if", "might", "could", "probably", "perhaps", "expected", or "projected" in one of those reports you would be dead of alcohol poisoning by the time you were half through it). Its simply assumptions built upon one another until the final analysis is a veritable lottery win if you get them all correct.
After the reports come out, the activists in the media, education, and the political class take the worst case scenarios from the reports, inflate them further and pass them of as FACT to the uninformed public. After which they attack the credibility of anyone that isn't in lock-step with them. Even the least skeptical person among us should have doubts about their motives.
"Climate Change" is something that happens. It always has and always will. We don't have the power to change it either way. To say otherwise is to be a desperate cool-aid drinker or to have a vested interest in promoting it.
BTW, as the 1998 cooling trend continues, more and more scientists are publicly coming out against the popular notion of AGW (anthropological global warming). They (wisely) don't want their reputations to go down with the ship.
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 12:35PM Assmar said
Can we just elect Will Wright our "Dr. Seuss"? Since he's not making good games anyway, he can just make kids games with a message.
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 12:41PM Ethan said
Definitely Lost Planet.
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 1:27PM Bailers77 said
The villians will be shooting CFC's as their WMD.
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 2:46PM (Unverified) said
Except the problem with your argument, yiggitron, is that the "climate change" you speak of as happening throughout history was insubstantial compared to the current changes taking place in the Earth's climate as of now. The earth's temperature in the past 60 years has risen dramatically and as a result we're seeing weather phenomonea the likes of which haven't been seen in millions of years. The "warming periods" in history argument that is often used against this doesn't really work because the incline and temperature isn't even a quarter of the difference seen in recent years. This is basic elementary school science, we know that pollution damages the environment, when the environment is damaged =O the ozone layer weakens, as a result warmer weather, simple enough for you to understand? The only reason the republicans and conservative critics are fighting this is because it means they'd have to stab in the back one of their key interest groups, the oil lobbyists who help pay for their re-election campaigns. Now we can play cute and coy and act like this is something just invented by house and Senate democrats to push through enviromentally friendly legislation and give the free market the finger but it seems to me that when scientists of over 180 nations have been researching this and as a result have signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocol and the US is the only modern industrial nation that hasn't, that there's a little bit of a problem here with us being slow on the uptake.
as for the evolution debate, I'm not even going to really get into this. The scientific community holds a 99.7% consensus of support on evolution. That means .3 or less of the entire scientific community either disagrees or is unsure of evolution. If it's not obvious by now that evolution is scientific fact, than that's your problem and personal hangups not mine. Oh and before I have to listen to this argument again, let me nip it in the bud. A scientific theory doesn't not indicate it is a theory with which there is currently no resolution, it simply is the title given to any resolution and thesis of a scientific experiment. You know...such as the Theory of Relativity, but then again, maybe it is just an idea, maybe Einstein was wrong and gravity does not exist and we're all just floating in space, we just don't know yet, the science isn't all in! :-P
as for the evolution debate, I'm not even going to really get into this. The scientific community holds a 99.7% consensus of support on evolution. That means .3 or less of the entire scientific community either disagrees or is unsure of evolution. If it's not obvious by now that evolution is scientific fact, than that's your problem and personal hangups not mine. Oh and before I have to listen to this argument again, let me nip it in the bud. A scientific theory doesn't not indicate it is a theory with which there is currently no resolution, it simply is the title given to any resolution and thesis of a scientific experiment. You know...such as the Theory of Relativity, but then again, maybe it is just an idea, maybe Einstein was wrong and gravity does not exist and we're all just floating in space, we just don't know yet, the science isn't all in! :-P
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 3:29PM (Unverified) said
Well I was sticking strictly with the argument on the direct effect of the depletion of the ozone layer which I believe scientists have been gradually warning about since the late 90s (not that anyone listened), I'm aware of the greenhouse effect though as well but didn't include it in initial argument. You're pretty spot-on though.
Reply
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 3:59PM Vordus said
Ozone has no relation to global warming though, it's the depletion of the layer of atmosphere that catches most of the sun's UV rays... which... uh... cause sunburn and cancer? I think?
Why can I only remember the bits of science that involved making things explode with Bunsen burners?
Reply
Why can I only remember the bits of science that involved making things explode with Bunsen burners?
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 4:10PM (Unverified) said
Nicholas Muldoon: "The earth's temperature in the past 60 years has risen dramatically and as a result we're seeing weather phenomonea the likes of which haven't been seen in millions of years."
- There were several major temperature increases in the last century, neither which coincide directly with growth in industrialization. Temperatures plateaued in 1998 and have now taken a sharp downturn. The level of CO2 has not increased during this time.
"This is basic elementary school science,"
- If you ever heard the term "A bit of knowledge is dangerous" you wouldn't brag about your elementary school understanding of climate science.
"We know that pollution damages the environment, when the environment is damaged =O the ozone layer weakens, as a result warmer weather, simple enough for you to understand?"
- Again, your elementary school level of science on display, an over-simplistic and completely naive understanding about a system as radically complex as the earth's atmosphere.
"180 nations have been researching this and as a result have signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocol"
- Can you if those nations have actually met the Kyoto's CO2 targets? (The answer is no. instead of a 5% decrease in CO2 over 1990 levels they have been responsible for a 27% increase! Considering that fact, the only net result of Kyoto is certain brokers of eco-credits, select corporations, and government bureaucrats were able to get rich off of taxes and regulations imposed by it.)
"the US is the only modern industrial nation that hasn't, that there's a little bit of a problem here with us being slow on the uptake."
- Oh yes, the: "All the cool kids are doing it" argument... good one.
Listen Nick, I don't expect to convince you. I've found there are a certain amount of people in this world than WANT there to be global warming. The Environmental Activists (neo-pantheists) need a devil for their religion, the misanthropes and luddites need a battlefront. the Government bureaucrats need a reason for expanding their regulatory power, the global socialists need a way to transfer money from one country to another, the corporations need to have an edge over their (non-green) competitors, and finally... the elementary school level "scientists" need something to feel smart about.
Reply
- There were several major temperature increases in the last century, neither which coincide directly with growth in industrialization. Temperatures plateaued in 1998 and have now taken a sharp downturn. The level of CO2 has not increased during this time.
"This is basic elementary school science,"
- If you ever heard the term "A bit of knowledge is dangerous" you wouldn't brag about your elementary school understanding of climate science.
"We know that pollution damages the environment, when the environment is damaged =O the ozone layer weakens, as a result warmer weather, simple enough for you to understand?"
- Again, your elementary school level of science on display, an over-simplistic and completely naive understanding about a system as radically complex as the earth's atmosphere.
"180 nations have been researching this and as a result have signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocol"
- Can you if those nations have actually met the Kyoto's CO2 targets? (The answer is no. instead of a 5% decrease in CO2 over 1990 levels they have been responsible for a 27% increase! Considering that fact, the only net result of Kyoto is certain brokers of eco-credits, select corporations, and government bureaucrats were able to get rich off of taxes and regulations imposed by it.)
"the US is the only modern industrial nation that hasn't, that there's a little bit of a problem here with us being slow on the uptake."
- Oh yes, the: "All the cool kids are doing it" argument... good one.
Listen Nick, I don't expect to convince you. I've found there are a certain amount of people in this world than WANT there to be global warming. The Environmental Activists (neo-pantheists) need a devil for their religion, the misanthropes and luddites need a battlefront. the Government bureaucrats need a reason for expanding their regulatory power, the global socialists need a way to transfer money from one country to another, the corporations need to have an edge over their (non-green) competitors, and finally... the elementary school level "scientists" need something to feel smart about.
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 4:51PM (Unverified) said
Yiggitron:
- There were several major temperature increases in the last century, neither which coincide directly with growth in industrialization. Temperatures plateaued in 1998 and have now taken a sharp downturn. The level of CO2 has not increased during this time.
Is this a joke? the average temperature globally shot dramatically up after only 20 years of the Industrial revolution and have continued to rise dramatically in the past 40 years. If you wanna compare year by year, go ahead, but the fact is there is a rising trend in the global temperature in comparison to the expected average over the course of the past century, even comparing 2000 to 1850 you'll see a massive change in weather patterns and average temperatures.
- Again, your elementary school level of science on display, an over-simplistic and completely naive understanding about a system as radically complex as the earth's atmosphere.
Well that's cute, but apparently my naive understanding of the earth's atmosphere was good enough that when the IPCC's findings came out the national science academies of every modern industrialized nation approved and endorsed them.
- Can you if those nations have actually met the Kyoto's CO2 targets? (The answer is no. instead of a 5% decrease in CO2 over 1990 levels they have been responsible for a 27% increase! Considering that fact, the only net result of Kyoto is certain brokers of eco-credits, select corporations, and government bureaucrats were able to get rich off of taxes and regulations imposed by it.)
Which is especially no surprise seeing as the US is still responsible for 22% of global CO2 emissions, more so than any other nation. I'm sure though that the rise globally was a direct response to the Kyoto Protocol though, right? It wasn't just a continuation of the effects of industrial growth. Naturally by signing and ratifying the Kyoto Protocol all CO2 emissions from other nations would dramatically decrease in just a year or two, it's not like Mitigation and Geoengineering take time and money.
- The Environmental Activists (neo-pantheists) need a devil for their religion, the misanthropes and luddites need a battlefront. the Government bureaucrats need a reason for expanding their regulatory power, the global socialists need a way to transfer money from one country to another, the corporations need to have an edge over their (non-green) competitors, and finally... the elementary school level "scientists" need something to feel smart about.
Right, just as there's people who NEED to convince themselves that global warming is a myth. The corporate giants need something to spare themselves of any blame or responsibility for environmental damage, government bureaucrats and global corporationists need to ensure that the free market stays unchecked so that they can keep themselves rich and their companies profitable with no regard for the effects it has on others and finally.. so that the truly delusional can convince themselves that global warming is a myth and a conspiracy so that they can live with no burden and not have to fear that their inaction and sense of false security won't put the real burden on the next generation. Truly admirable
- There were several major temperature increases in the last century, neither which coincide directly with growth in industrialization. Temperatures plateaued in 1998 and have now taken a sharp downturn. The level of CO2 has not increased during this time.
Is this a joke? the average temperature globally shot dramatically up after only 20 years of the Industrial revolution and have continued to rise dramatically in the past 40 years. If you wanna compare year by year, go ahead, but the fact is there is a rising trend in the global temperature in comparison to the expected average over the course of the past century, even comparing 2000 to 1850 you'll see a massive change in weather patterns and average temperatures.
- Again, your elementary school level of science on display, an over-simplistic and completely naive understanding about a system as radically complex as the earth's atmosphere.
Well that's cute, but apparently my naive understanding of the earth's atmosphere was good enough that when the IPCC's findings came out the national science academies of every modern industrialized nation approved and endorsed them.
- Can you if those nations have actually met the Kyoto's CO2 targets? (The answer is no. instead of a 5% decrease in CO2 over 1990 levels they have been responsible for a 27% increase! Considering that fact, the only net result of Kyoto is certain brokers of eco-credits, select corporations, and government bureaucrats were able to get rich off of taxes and regulations imposed by it.)
Which is especially no surprise seeing as the US is still responsible for 22% of global CO2 emissions, more so than any other nation. I'm sure though that the rise globally was a direct response to the Kyoto Protocol though, right? It wasn't just a continuation of the effects of industrial growth. Naturally by signing and ratifying the Kyoto Protocol all CO2 emissions from other nations would dramatically decrease in just a year or two, it's not like Mitigation and Geoengineering take time and money.
- The Environmental Activists (neo-pantheists) need a devil for their religion, the misanthropes and luddites need a battlefront. the Government bureaucrats need a reason for expanding their regulatory power, the global socialists need a way to transfer money from one country to another, the corporations need to have an edge over their (non-green) competitors, and finally... the elementary school level "scientists" need something to feel smart about.
Right, just as there's people who NEED to convince themselves that global warming is a myth. The corporate giants need something to spare themselves of any blame or responsibility for environmental damage, government bureaucrats and global corporationists need to ensure that the free market stays unchecked so that they can keep themselves rich and their companies profitable with no regard for the effects it has on others and finally.. so that the truly delusional can convince themselves that global warming is a myth and a conspiracy so that they can live with no burden and not have to fear that their inaction and sense of false security won't put the real burden on the next generation. Truly admirable
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 5:36PM (Unverified) said
I'm surprised that you put so much faith in the IPCC. Do you know how the IPCC creates a report? Its hardly scientific. No double-blind studies, the authors of the report are screened by government officials, the report is reviewed TWICE by GOVERNMENT officials BEFORE it is released (hmmm. why would government officials need to review it??). The science is controlled from beginning to end by bureaucrats with a vested interest.
Its no secret, check their site > http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/index.htm
What is so amazing is that even in light of their obvious bias they can't bring themselves to make any definitive claims about AGW. Per my first post, It is all: "if" "might", "could", "probably", "perhaps", "expected", or "projected".
So if the IPCC agrees with you, then you apparently agree with me that there is nothing definitive about AGW and it is speculation at best.
And here I thought I couldn't convince you. :)
BTW, if you really want to see something interesting, try researching the backgrounds of the 2500 "scientists" that signed the IPCC's 2007 report
Reply
Its no secret, check their site > http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/index.htm
What is so amazing is that even in light of their obvious bias they can't bring themselves to make any definitive claims about AGW. Per my first post, It is all: "if" "might", "could", "probably", "perhaps", "expected", or "projected".
So if the IPCC agrees with you, then you apparently agree with me that there is nothing definitive about AGW and it is speculation at best.
And here I thought I couldn't convince you. :)
BTW, if you really want to see something interesting, try researching the backgrounds of the 2500 "scientists" that signed the IPCC's 2007 report
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 5:43PM (Unverified) said
I'll do that, I'm sure I'll find shocking conclusions like that =O they're scientists! and apparently science has a liberal bias! I mean government overseeing scientific research, that's outrageous! We better let the free market scientists who only get funding from Exxon to share their results. I mean god knows that it's not like a conservative administration would ever control public awareness of the results of scientific research, the Bush administration was never found out of doing that on Global Warming, nope, no way Jose, You needa stop getting your news from Rush Limbaugh and learn more about how the scientific process works, honey.
Reply
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 5:25PM (Unverified) said
Nanny-state buffoonery. Is it any wonder nobody respects the English anymore? Somebody tell Lord Buggernuts to stick his tea and crumpets up his arse.
Posted: Feb 9th 2009 6:44PM (Unverified) said
Coldest winter here in Minnesota in decades. Ill take global warming over cooling any day. ppl in teh UK are idiots







