Our Oil Sands based economy in Alberta enabled many people to pay to see Titanic, Aliens, Terminator and T2, Avatar, etc....so much of his vast fortune are indirectly because of the production of oil. If he were to take 40% of his fortune and plant trees, purchase land for animal sanctuary's etc then at least he'd be using the money to directly make a difference.
James Cameron - Hypocrite
- Thread starter vistaVision
- Start date
jlee562
Sr Member
No, it has not been proven to be a scam.
Let me put it to you this way, friend.
Why is it a "scam" when a plurality of scientists from across the globe actually agree with the general principle that man can have an impact on the climate?
Now, you have to bear in mind while answering this question, that ExxonMobil, which I'm sure you know is a giant oil company who has a vested interest in maintaining their profit margins by selling oil, has been funding global warming skeptics to the tune of millions of dollars.
Leaked internal memos from Exxon (PDF link) note that:
It should also be noted that Exxon lied about stopping their funding to anti-climate change groups and continued to do it anyway.
Now, where's the conspiracy?
You really believe the a massive body of governments, scientists, and research organizations are ALL involved in a massive conspiracy? When in the history of nation states have we EVER seen this kind of cooperation? The answer is simple: never.
On the other hand, the criticisms you make about carbon offsets and what not, those same exact things are going on in the oil industry. And yet, you don't lash out at that as a "scam" or call them "crooks," (even though the world's oil supply is controlled by a CARTEL which manipulates production levels to keep them at artificial levels).
Friend, I appreciate the effort, but you're missing the forest for the trees. As I said above, even we accept that all of East Anglia's research was wrong, that still would not change the totality of evidence in favor of anthropogenic warming. One dissenting MP does not invalidate the report. Unless you are seriously going to argue that gov't groups always come to 100% consensus on everything. We all know that's not true.
As I said above, you need to stop listening to the sensationalized media reports (IE: exactly what you've presented here as "evidence").
I've covered my thoughts on the science of it tons on the global warming thread.
But the topic of people like Cameron telling the rest of us how to live is a case where this great line applies.........
"I'll believe it's a crisis when the people who are claiming it's a crisis start acting like it's a crisis."
No signs of that yet.
But the topic of people like Cameron telling the rest of us how to live is a case where this great line applies.........
"I'll believe it's a crisis when the people who are claiming it's a crisis start acting like it's a crisis."
No signs of that yet.
vistaVision
Sr Member
Well, it may not be proven to be a scam, it also hasn't been proven to be science.
No, but when the Greentroopers come knocking on my door, they are going to have a rude awakening.
jlee562
Sr Member
Ok, so I'll pose the question to you as well then: at what point, in the collective judgment of the posters here (for example) does Cameron NOT become a hypocrite? What sacrifices does he have to make in order to not be labeled a hypocrite?
How do you know what steps Cameron has or has not taken?
Walk the walk.
Sacrifice on a level commensurate with his rhetoric which is at times extreme.
Lead by example.
Not carbon credits and attempts at public policy manipulation and hot air.
And while he's at it. That's HIS choice. Not mine.
Get out of my freekin garage, house and wallet with his views on the matter.
He can preach it all day, but he makes it a public policy change attempt, then my guns are coming out firing back. He is a hypocrite!
Ford GT for me, but not for thee.
He wants to live "green" then DO IT.
People are tired of millionaires in mansions and private jets telling everyone else to sacrifice.
jlee562
Sr Member
So then how do you know what Cameron has or has not done in his personal life? The above is all well and good reasoning (and something on which I don't really disagree in principle), but short on actual evidence and facts of him being a hypocrite.
What do you mean by sacrifice? Are you calling for him to move into a two bedroom house?
Let me be clear, I'm not "defending" Cameron as such with my comments. I'm merely trying to discern how it is y'all are condemning a man for being a hypocrite. He very well may be one. But I certainly don't know for sure and I don't have any evidence to say that he is one. Surely someone here must have a reason beyond the simple rhetoric of "walk the walk."
Because until you prove that he's not walking the walk, you shouldn't be calling him a hypocrite.
What does he mean by "we have to live with less"?
Enviroment friendly technology (solar panels, cars etc.) is not that developed yet to act as a substitute. Most people can't afford that technology yet.
Does Mr. Cameron know that not only gas is a product extracted from oil? Most of the plastics (styrene, resin, ABS, PVC etc.) are made from it, even the soles of his ****** sportshoes wouldn't exist without oil. I don't care if Mr. Cameron has a fleet of dirt bikes or submarines but indeed his statement is hypocrite.
It's the same anywhere in the world with celebrities or politicians:
They tell us to drink water and they drink wine, nothing new.
"To live with less" has a widespreading meaning...how many people have a fulltime job, a family or bank loans. They already struggle to keep their head above water - how much less should they live with?
Enviroment friendly technology (solar panels, cars etc.) is not that developed yet to act as a substitute. Most people can't afford that technology yet.
Does Mr. Cameron know that not only gas is a product extracted from oil? Most of the plastics (styrene, resin, ABS, PVC etc.) are made from it, even the soles of his ****** sportshoes wouldn't exist without oil. I don't care if Mr. Cameron has a fleet of dirt bikes or submarines but indeed his statement is hypocrite.
It's the same anywhere in the world with celebrities or politicians:
They tell us to drink water and they drink wine, nothing new.
"To live with less" has a widespreading meaning...how many people have a fulltime job, a family or bank loans. They already struggle to keep their head above water - how much less should they live with?
pennausamike
Sr Member
This is easy to answer.
James Cameron should model exactly the behavior just as he says is necessary for others live up to.
Live in a home of less than 2,500 square feet.
Don't own more than two cars, and make sure they are high MPG, smaller vehicles.
Get rid of any sport vehicles (dirt bike collection, sports cars, Harleys, the Ducatti, the helicopter).
Take commercial air transportation just like everyone else.
Cameron holds Avatar up as some environmentalist role model,
but the people of Pandora kill, skin and butcher their own food;
and they have to defacate in the woods (using leaves for toilet paper, I guess).
They have no paper, no cinema and minimal arts.
There was nothing about Pandora that was attractive to me for more than a three hour visit.
Cameron is elitist in nearly all his published views.
He has stated that he likes guns, but supports gun control for the masses,
but not for him.
The same applies to technology.
He rails against tech in his films,
(Aliens, Terminator and T2, Titanic, Avatar)
yet his artistic visions are only possible because of the tech available to him.
I liked Cameron's movies up to Avatar.
While I enjoyed the 3-D spectacle, the "message" was so in-your-face,
I didn't care about the story once the lights came up.
I'll never purchase the Avatar DVD because it is hypocritical commercial for a lifestyle and thought process
that Cameron himself does not practice.
Mike
Last edited:
He should live as a minamalist as far as his carbon footprint goes if that is what he believes. He can still be a gazillionaire.
He is thousands of times over what any of us are.
Here's what he should REALLY do.....
Start attempting to produce technological solutions that are obviously better market answers.
In other words, build a freekin better mousetrap! The world always embraces better solutions.
Don't ***** at the rest of us to give up what we value without offering something BETTER. Quit trying to jam their beliefs down the rest of our throats.
You can tell which thing is easier to do though huh?
Gripe and attempt to brute force policy or actually build something that is universally embraced.
Last edited:
This is the best Thread I've ever read in 8 years on the RPF.
I'm imagining everyone saying all this to each other in person in the same room, except everyone is being played by Eddie Deezen, which makes it more hilarious.
I don't litter, or recycle, so I guess I'm netural on the whole subject.
I'm imagining everyone saying all this to each other in person in the same room, except everyone is being played by Eddie Deezen, which makes it more hilarious.
I don't litter, or recycle, so I guess I'm netural on the whole subject.
DarkKnight
Sr Member
Who cares what he owns, he earned it fair and square and he deserves all the toys he wants, as for me, Im already living with less thanks to Obama, personally i wish all those in Hollywood would just make movies and STFU about everything else, if he wants to take away my freedom to waste resources it makes me mad, but all I can say is that its hard for me to be angry at the creator of the Terminator or Aliens, the Aliens BluRay comes out next week and as long as his remastering isnt teh effd up mess Lucas did to the Original Trilogy, me and Cameron are cool
I don't think anyone is arguing that he shouldn't be able to enjoy the luxuries of his success, but rather that if he's such a big proponent of people living highly sustainable lifestyles, he should live one himself.
If he was content just making films, and said nothing of the environment, this thread wouldn't even exist and no one would begrudge him of the trappings of his success.
As to the rest of it, I've made the mistake of getting into a political discussion earlier this week on here. That thread is now locked. I think I'll stay far away from this one.
-Nick
Perhaps J.C. takes his own initials a little too seriously.
Ever wonder why that Harlan Ellison credit got added to Terminator?.......
Plagiarism, the Sincerest Form of Flattery
jlee562
Sr Member
pennausamike is the only person who provided an actual answer to the question (although I would say that you're reading too much into the Na'vi lifestyle, I don't believe it was Cameron's intention to present a hunter-gather society as the ideal).
With due respect Cessna, you just rephrased what you've already written, and that doesn't answer the question. You didn't name anything specific. You haven't defined what it means for Cameron to be a hypocrite nor what it means for him to NOT be a hypocrite. You're maligning him with no evidence, and with no rational reason or standards for doing so.
Similar threads
