Planet of the Humans (Michael Moore) is free to watch for 30 days
I would be curious to hear what others think about it.<p>The film makes bold claims, but I have trouble locating sources for these claims.<p>Some are verifiable easily, like Al Gore selling his TV channel to Al Jazeera and thus taking a huge chunk of money coming directly from fossil fuels.<p>Others are harder to verify: solar panels and wind do cost more energy (fossil&#x2F;coal) overall to make (from resource extraction at the mine to final product installation) than they will ever make over their lifetime. I found some claims one way or the other for this, but they&#x27;re not very substantiated either way (ans a lot come from solar panel installer blogpost type of article that say it&#x27;s not true... well of course they&#x27;d say that)<p>Other parts, unless they were heavily edited, do seem real: asking where the energy comes from to power GM&#x27;s electric car at their fanfare annoucement and finding out it&#x27;s coal. Or asking all the leaders for seemingly green lobbying efforts what they think of biomass (basically chopping down the forest arount the power plan to then feed it the trees to produce energy: a huge net waste of energy vs coal or gas or oil) and have them all blank out or don&#x27;t instantly say they are against it.<p>So, has anyone any insight on these claims? Where do we stand?<p>I think the overall message that there is no way exponential growth on a finite planet is anything else than suicide, no matter what theater politics and initiatives we use to hide the fact that we are using up the planet is worth listening to. I&#x27;m just analyzing this movie the same way I assess crazy and anti-science claims like 5G is harmful or anti-vaxxers which usually rely on bogus studies, bad science, and plain unfounded claims.