> Being preached at about science by a population of people who probably mostly failed high school science is not a good time.

I agree with the part about preaching, but fair is fair: they were preaching scientific consensus. They preach what is said by the overwhelming majority of active scientific researchers in this field.

You didn’t say they were wrong I agree, but still .. they were (/ are) right. And why should they be perfect, anyway? They are who they are, flawed and all, but they are right about this and they were right to make that movie and they were right about people being selfish.

Ironically you could say that we are now basically reenacting the movie, proving its point. There’s an asteroid heading for us and here we are, judging the high school grades of the people telling us about its trajectory.

I thought it was very depressing and surprisingly self reflective and poignant in that sense.

People who complain about being "preached" at while the world burns behind them are exactly the kind of people the movie is poking fun at

I don't think the movie was snobby: it was full of over-the-top gags, and it was clear to me that the movie was never taking itself too seriously.

The main character (played by DiCaprio) is also depicted as a quite flawed and vain human being as well.

Also honestly, who doesn't feel frustration at the whole real-world situation the movie is actually about?

Actors act, writers write. You seem to be confused about who was "preaching".

I've confirmed that both writers of the movie graduated high school, and one of them even graduated college.

> about science by a population of people who probably mostly failed high school science

Your assumption that actors (and writers, those where the ones “preaching” more than the people on screen) have failed highschool at a higher rate than the general population is, I think, rather flawed¹. There are some very bright people in the entertainment industries for one reason or another (doing what they enjoy, and presumably are good at, instead of something else they are good at, being a common situation, there being more money in stardom being another).

Hence a number successful stand-ups who have degrees (in the sciences, not necessarily “media studies” before someone pipe up with that), PhDs, law certifications, and such.

Hedy Lamarr is the best known poster child for this, but too many think she is a singleton exception rather than an indicator that we shouldn't make too many assumptions about what acting talent might imply about other mental abilities.

----

[1] And, in fact, more snobby than the film you are critiquing as being snobby!

Why would you assume people that went on to have successful film careers failed high school science? Just because someone doesn't pursue science as a career doesn't mean they received bad grades in it, especially at a high school level.

Couldn't they push heat pump units that cool and heat (with a bonus of not being reliant on wood or natural gas)?

Or do the regions that matter the most get too cold for heat pumps?

[flagged]