Talk:ManBearPig

message: Sounds promising. Seems like it's going to be all about the boys. I wouldn't be surprised if Matt and Trey find a way to sneak in something political though. Orichalcon 06:49, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Promising 

message: I take it that this is about Gore's constant warnings of global warming. If not, then I don't know what. Megaplx 10:18, 26 April 2006
:It is.
-G  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.117.158.83 (talk) 04:57, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Messages 

message: Did anyone find the rescue part of the episode similar to what happened about two months ago in mexico with the Pasta de Conchos mine disaster? el oso 06:49, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: more like Tom Sawyer, Id say Metao 08:50, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pasta de Conchos mine disaster 

message: Regarding "This is the second episode based around a visit to a real-life Colorado location (the first being "Casa Bonita")." what about the episode, Butters' Very Own Episode where Butters is trying to get to Bennegins with his parents. The restauraunt chain is certainly a real life place, I drove past one today for the first time.
:The point was to note that those two episodes were based around significant Colorado attractions. Casa Bonita has an almost legendary reputation in the Colorado area, but Bennigans is a non-significant nationwide restaurant chain. It's not notable that Butters and his parents were going to go there.Raymondluxuryacht 20:27, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's not forget Shakey's! -Mysekurity [m!] 20:52, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  RE: Casa Bonita 

message: I posted the trivia element about Tom Sawyer while I was still watching it, but there are additional references: the boys escape the cavern and visit their own memorial service; Tom carries Becky in the cave when she is unconscious; the promo photograph showing kids next to the fake treasure shows Tom Sawyer-style hats on the tourists.  Did nobody see these parallels but me? -- Rpresser 05:15, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tom Sawyer 

message: Not just that you guys have enough time to write an <I>encylopedia</I> entry about a recent South Park episode, but someone bothers to note how "water" is misspelled on Cartman's bottle? Un-be-freaking-lievable. Get some lives, won't you?
::It's not nearly as unbelievable as the fact that someone actually would have enough time to COMPLAIN about the people writing an <I>encylopedia</I> entry about a recent South Park episode. Get a life, won't you?Slipzen 15:24, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That life thing sounds cool, but I'm not compiling it without a makefile. I'll wait until it's in the repository. --24.51.94.14 12:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Totally unbelievable 

message: Is it just me or Kenny's voice is a lot easier to understand in this episode??--Sonjaaa 17:23, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My guess is that the writers are feeling more and more stifled by Kenny's inexpressivity. Matt Gies 18:19, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: kenny's voice

message: AOLNews reported yesterday that sources close to Al Gore say he is considering running again. Maybe this will replace "Ozone-Man" as the new Gore-ridicule term. People on the street can ask him if he's caught manbearpig yet.Chesty95 14:57, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Election 2008 

message: *pretty funny http://www.youtube.com/v/aIPcqlMTQHs  70.48.250.138 08:56, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: An Inconvenient Spoof

message: If anyone here seen the film "Volcano" (the story of the volcano in downtown LA), it'd be nice if someone a bit more eloquent could perhaps come over and lend a hand describing some of the similiarities between this episode and it. --Tony Eberly 12:20, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Volcano and manbearpig 

message: Replaced the video excerpt with a YouTube link, as I think it would be better to not link to a site with porn links if possible. -68.114.154.249 19:39, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Video excerpt

message: In light of the ExxonMobil YouTube video scandal, we have to ask ourselves-- was this episode possibly bought and paid for by the oil companies? //// Pacific PanDeist * 19:54, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To global warmers, everything that questions global warming is paid by oil companies.  The more important question is, are all the global warming supporters paid by Al Gore and Greenpeace? 67.70.57.232 03:22, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, its pretty much been proved that everything that questions global warming is paid by oil companies... even Pat Robertson is now preaching against global warming... and your "important question" makes no sense at all-- I suppose the melting glaciers were really done by Greenpeace with hairdryers to fake effects of global warming? Anyway, say what you want while you still have electricity... but since your in Canada, maybe global warming will work out for you... //// Pacific PanDeist * 04:53, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: oh ya, i sure would like to see your purported rigorous proof of "everything that questions global warming is paid for by oil companies", oh yes.  Oh ya, glacier melting must be because of global warming!  oh ya, hurricane katrina must be caused by global warming!  oh yes, people getting cancer must be because of global warming!  oh ya, earthquake in Indonesia must've been caused by global warming, oh sure; poverty must be caused by global warming! 67.70.57.232 09:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Brilliant argument of your!! Obviously, anyone who believes that the millions of tons of burning pollution we shoot into the air every year is bad must believe that global warming causes receding hairlines and failed Hollywood marriages, right? Do you live next to, say, an auto factory? A coal-burning energy plant? Would you want to? You got some of your facts mixed up there-- global warming doesn't cause cancer, but many kinds of pollution do cause cancer, and that is not even a controversy... weather volatility does not cause poverty, but what do you suppose happens when a heat wave (or a super-cold winter) destroys a farmer's crops or knocks out power to thousands of businesses - like what we had for weeks this summer!! Do you think this is what God intends for creation? Or should we tend to our garden? //// Pacific PanDeist * 02:32, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I doubt that EVERYTHING that questions global warming is paid for by some oil company. It may be people too afraid to believe it. 140.159.2.31 00:56, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  actually the cancer one is because of the ozone layer :)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.76.60.163 (talk) 18:05, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Note: British courts have recently ruled that belief in global warming is a religious faith, unsupported by science. Now that major climate scientists have been exposed falsifying data, refusing to release data under FOIA, and corrupting the peer review process (aka climategate), it would be sensible for warmists to reconsider their faith. And no, I've never received a dime from Exxon, Pacific PanDeist is obviously paranoid.....71.95.151.21 (talk) 01:28, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  What British courts? What major climate scientists? When? Provide links or your statements are worth exactly nil. Devil Master (talk) 17:49, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[ExxonMobil YouTube video scandal]] 

message: The following text, give or take minor changes, has been added and deleted from this article by a number of editors:
:ManBearPig is shown above Gore in Al Gore's Penguin Army, a video posted on YouTube and presented as an amateur effort, which was later proved to have been made by DCI Group, a Republican marketing firm tied to ExxonMobil. It is unknown whether the makers of South Park authorized DCI Group to use the image, which appears to suggest an endorsement of the video by the makers of South Park.
It would, of course, be better to resolve the inclusion of this material here, rather than via an edit-war in the article. No one removing this text - several IP's and one new account - has left an edit summary explaining why it should be removed., , . One of those anon IP's has since been blocked for vandalism. Since the editors who have added or restored the text are more established editors and have explained its inclusion/restoration, the removal appears to be simple vandalism, and further unexplained deletions of this or other text will be treated as such. bd2412 T 00:24, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: unrelated and speculation, removed.  You should not add info that is speculation and uncited, it's considered vandalism.  Administrator like you should know better.  Adadqwqwe 07:43, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reviewed the video discussed in the section. It does indeed contain ManBearPig and uses similar methodology to parody Gore, and is therefore hardly "unrelated". The material is copiously cited in the target article. I will remove the speculative language with respect to the 'appearance of endorsement'. I note that the removal of this text from the article was your first edit to Wikipedia. We use talk-page discussions to resolve matters of this nature, so please discuss the matter here and achieve a consensus with better-established editors before reverting again. Cheers! bd2412 T 13:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: What does it have to do with this episode?  Should we include http://www.manbearpig.com/ too? 70.48.251.164 18:33, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Others have suggested that Al Gore really stands in for now-president George Bush, and the manbearpig for the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction that which supossed existence were initially cited as reasons for the invasion of Iraq, comparing the picture of manbearpig shown around by Al Gore to the images of Iraqi trucks carrieing mobile bioweapons labs as shown by Colin Powell before the UN. 
This seems to be a wholly implausible interpretation, and should not be included without citation as to who these "others" are that have suggested this, and why their opinion matters. bd2412 T 16:37, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of [[Al Gore's Penguin Army video scandal]] material 

message: What are Trey Parker and Matt Stone trying to prove? I'm a fan of comedy, like any other normal person, but not when there is a hidden political message behind everything, especially when that message is brainless. Global warming is real and what Al Gore is doing is great. The problem with his movie is not with the facts, but with the fact that he represents himself as the lone man trying to convince the world of this problem. Why couldn't South Park have spoofed that? This isn't even a political issue, this is a smart vs stupid issue. If you don't believe in global warming, you are not smart. If you don't believe that humans are causing global warming, and all the recent heat waves and hurricanes are a direct result of that, then you are not smart. In summary, if you do not believe what the greatest minds in the world have to say about global warming, then you are stupid. I don't know much about Parker and Stone, but they are sending the wrong message here. 
Since when did global warming and science in general become so uncool? I hate it. These days, it's like, "you read books? You care about the world we live in? HAHA, ur gay." 67.161.26.190 06:38, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While I, personally, feel global warming IS a major problem, there is no justification for calling proponents of alternative theories "not smart", because those theories (especially those that propose that the variance is within normal climatological shifts) so have some merit. Just because I don't believe them myself doesn't make those theories brainless or ignorant, as they are well-conceived and are not unintelligent in construction. -- Ubergenius 17:56, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Show me one scientist who say that Hurricane Katrina is caused by global warming.142.151.175.39 23:13, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sadly, there are some scientists who say that.  Most don't, however (not that consensus means fact).  I will have to dig it up, but there was an Idaho meteorologist who (this is a tangent, not global warming) said that Katrina was caused by a device developed by the Japanese mafia.  He "retired" to pursue his theory. Professor Chaos 18:49, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Scientist generally don't contribute complex phenomena solely to one issue. However AFAIK the majority of scientists working global warming and hurricanes believe it has most probably contributed to the the increase in number and strength of hurricanes including Hurricane Katrina. The official spokesperson US Republican's liked to use in the aftermath of Hurrican Katrina was AFAIK one of the few who doesn't believe this (although he still believes global warming is a problem) Nil Einne 10:21, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Who is the guy you're talking about?  Most global warming alarmists I've heard say that global warming isn't increasing the number of hurricanes,  only the strength.  The best source in my opinion is William Gray, who is one of the world's top hurricane experts.  He says that not only did global warming not cause Katrina, but that most scientists don't believe global warming is a problem, but the media doesn't talk to them because it's not interesting or politically correct to say it won't cause a disaster.  On a different note, what happened in New Orleans was a man made environmental disaster.  I don't mean that man caused the hurricane, just that it was man's fault the damage was so bad.  New Orleans is on a delta.  Delta's are built up by river sediment that is dropped as the river loses speed when it meets a still body of water.  There are many lobes of the Mississippi Delta, and New Orleans is built on the currently active one.  Since we built levies, there is no longer sediment building the levy up, which is why New Orleans has settled below sea level.  Now river deposition is no longer a dominant process, but wave action is actively eroding the delta.  We can rebuild New Orleans, but it will be ruined again and again, and it will ultimately be a losing battle.  Man cannot defeat nature (one reason I think environmental alarmists are silly), and if we fight nature, nature will always win in the end, and it is only a matter of time before New Orleans is permanently gone from the map.  Professor Chaos 07:43, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  This episode wasn't about any hidden political messages.  The idea of Manbearpig was something they thought was silly and wanted to do for a while.  They expressed irritation that Inconvenient Truth won Best Documentary only because 'It's not a documentary, it's a PowerPoint presentation.'  Still, they acknowledged that they didn't go into the political messages because they liked the story of the boys being trapped in the cave.  All this info can be verified in their commentary for the episode, which is available online. 65.93.75.168 00:03, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Really I think they were just taking the mick with Gore. He's acting silly so they used the magic of burlesque to enhance that and have him act .. more silly. It doesn't mean he's wrong, it means he's acting like a crazy wrong man, regardless of whether he's actually right. South Park has shown again and again their view that some people can be fighting for a just cause in a totally douchebaggy way. Like, that "Smug" episode.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.72.21.221 (talk) 03:46, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

text: Wow, thank you so much for posting this not only here, but on my discussion page as well.  I hadn't ever heard of this organization and the amazing unbiased work they do.  Next, let's hope Algore get's his oscar.Professor Chaos 07:32, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Sarcasm, apparently, is lost on humorless kooks.  I do read.  If you're lucky, I'll tell you about the IPCC when my semester ends.  Right now, my grades are a higher priority. Professor Chaos 15:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: UN is an evil, monolithic, faceless bureaucracy; it doesn't represent scientists, it represents politicians.  142.150.205.250 07:19, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: I don't get it

message: In 2007, as part of its Fourth Assessment Report, the IPCC concluded that human actions are "very likely" the cause of global warming, meaning a 90% or greater probability.
"The world's leading climate scientists said global warming has begun, is very likely caused by man, and will be unstoppable for centuries, ... . The phrase very likely translates to a more than 90 percent certainty that global warming is caused by man's burning of fossil fuels. That was the strongest conclusion to date, making it nearly impossible to say natural forces are to blame."
"The report said that an increase in hurricane and tropical cyclone strength since 1970 more likely than not can be attributed to man-made global warming. The scientists said global warming's connection varies with storms in different parts of the world, but that the storms that strike the Americas are global warming-influenced."
"On sea levels, the report projects rises of 7-23 inches by the end of the century. That could be augmented by an additional 4-8 inches if recent surprising polar ice sheet melt continues."
:Wow, thank you so much for posting this not only here, but on my discussion page as well.  I hadn't ever heard of this organization and the amazing unbiased work they do.  Next, let's hope Algore get's his oscar.Professor Chaos 07:32, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sarcasm, apparently, is lost on humorless kooks.  I do read.  If you're lucky, I'll tell you about the IPCC when my semester ends.  Right now, my grades are a higher priority. Professor Chaos 15:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: UN is an evil, monolithic, faceless bureaucracy; it doesn't represent scientists, it represents politicians.  142.150.205.250 07:19, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 

message: Was there not a seperate article on how he thought it was funny etc.? --198.254.16.201 19:15, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Al Gore's reaction 

message: I have been trying to revert this to some kind of sense, but being a non South Park fan, it's hard to tell the nonsense vandalism from the real article!  Can someone who knows about such things please give this a read to check I've killed all the nonsense, and not zapped any real stuff.  Ta!  LeeG 22:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Help - a bit confused by vandals!

message: What is "Excelsior" referring to ?
Excelsior#Popular_culture: Stan Lee, who used it at the end of every "Bullpen Bulletins" column in the Marvel Comics Skinnersphere (talk) 14:03, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excelsior 

message: Why does the article not connect ManBearPig to global warming?  Yes, it's somewhat obvious, but if someone came to this page wondering what MBP is referring to, it should at least be noted that MBP is an analogy to global warming.  It is entirely possible to state this connection without arguing the merits of either side or defending/refuting Stone and Parker's apparent point. -- ScottK 71.63.53.201 01:39, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In all simplicity, because saying so is Original reasearch. ≈ The Haunted Angel 23:29, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: How about explaining the joke?

message: Cite and return to the article;
* The use of a pig-like animal (ManBearPig) by Al-Gore in an attempt to raise concern for the environment may in fact be a thinly-veiled reference to the Energy Hog campaign, a non-profit energy saving effort which was criticised as a "toothless" energy savings program (reference).
* The melody played when Al Gore for the first time shows the Manbearpig sketch is a part of Antonín Dvořák's Symphony No.9, "From the New World" (Adagio - Allegro molto). The excerpt is taken from the Heroes of Might and Magic video game series.
* Al Gore's abbreviation of ManBearPig, MBP, is an actual term used in the field of global warming research, used when describing the melting and recession of glaciers, Mass Balance Potential.
*Al Gore suggests the rescue team pour molten lead  into the cave to kill the manbearpig alludes to Alien 3, where the alien is killed after it is doused in molten lead.
Alastairward (talk) 11:01, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yup, I've seen it and I think I know what creature you mean. But again, that would be OR without a reliable source to link them. Alastairward (talk) 15:36, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cultural References and OR 

message: Gore is to be featured on Digg.com's Dialogg feature. The questions were chosen by voting and discussion processes, and the question "I was wondering if you could elaborate on your long term strategy for spreading ManBearPig awareness"(Digg) (Comedy Central)was selected. Should this be included, at least once this interview happens? -- Zblewski|talk  05:20, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Digg Dialogg

message: Should I add the fact that ManBearPig is manifested in the real world through the Imaginationland portal?  To me this is further proof that Al Gore has absolutely no basis for his creature, but is that necessary?76.11.240.242 (talk) 19:47, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Imaginationland Relevance?

message: The following sentence is unclear: "He also says throughout the episode that people will take him serial apparently his version of serious. "
Does this mean that he uses the word serial instead of the word serious?
--Badger151 (talk) 21:27, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Serial, serious 

message: Am I the only one who thought of The Pardoner's Tale when watching this? Plots against each other to take the treasure while hiding out in a cave? .froth. (talk) 04:53, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chaucer? 

message: The addition of a real-world reference to ManBearPig, without a third-party source indicating it's referring to this episode, is WP:SYNTHESIS, at best, and outright fraud, at worst.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 03:34, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This from Climate change policy of the United States?  99.181.135.38 (talk) 04:38, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: So?  Doesn't attempt to answer my question.  If it's about ManBearPig, it may be another one.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 08:20, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: So is the Denialosphere like a Denialism Venn diagram,  as Blogosphere would be all that is Blogs?  99.35.12.107 (talk) 22:24, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: ??? — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 04:40, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

text: It's almost certainly about the character, but we don't know the episode invented the character.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 01:26, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Climate War 

message: Add http://www.amazon.com/Climate-War-Believers-Power-Brokers/dp/140132326X#reader_140132326X for direct quote from book.  99.181.139.6 (talk) 06:12, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: See Climate change policy of the United States for Further reading   99.190.80.91 (talk) 06:22, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Still irrelevant.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 06:56, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: "Denialosphere" common reference to Climate change denial-sphere, example http://www.dailymail.co.uk/coffeebreak/chat/f/t-10136319/p-30/index.html  99.190.81.244 (talk) 07:42, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Probably true, but it's derogatory, not common knowledge, and so cannot be synthesized with the existing text from the book.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 08:21, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add http://www.amazon.com/Climate-War-Believers-Power-Brokers/dp/140132326X#reader_140132326X for direct quote from book.