First off, you did a decent amount of research into this, which I appreciate, but I wouldn't say it wasn't wholly biased... All of your sources were from people who think global warming isn't true... you could have looked at the scientific sources as well for a fair discussion of the issue.
The film is decently made, you present the argument in a well organized way, but you have an awful lot of text and slow down time. It could definitely be more visually appealing. You also need to cite your sources for animations and images (like the windmill schematic) that I presume are not your own.
As for the issues, I'll start with Plainly's comments. Plainly is talking about the obliquity and precession of the earth's axis, two phenomenon that are part of what are called the Milankovitch cycles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycle
), whereby the earth's axis tilts and precesses over 40,000-100,000 years. These cycles have historically been linked to slight shifts in earth's climate and the cyclic nature of ice ages (we've had at least 7 major ice ages in the last million years, the last of which ended about 15,000 years ago). If we are to believe the past trends of milankovitch cycles and ice ages, we should really have been entering a cooling cycle (ice age) in the last 1000 years or so, but some scientists think that anthropogenic methane from rice paddies and cow belching beginning about 6,000-8,000 years ago (the first human agriculture) kept the earth from going into the cooling cycle, and now CO2, Methane, chlorofluorocarbon (CFC), and ozone (O3) emissions are accelerating that warming in an unstoppable fashion.
So global warming began with our ancestors thousands of years ago when they started growing crops, and we are continuing the trend. You can see this (and the milankovitch cycles) if you look at the vostok ice core temperature and CO2 chart (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Vostok-ice-core-petit.png
). This chart is also one piece of evidence that over the course of the earth's history, CO2 really is linked to changes in global temperature, and that's one point on which the guy from the weather channel is very wrong. He said that CO2 is in very small concentrations in the atmosphere (which is true), but even so it has an inordinately high affect on global climate, because it lets through sunlight in the visible light band (the one at which most light comes in) but absorbs infrared light re-radiating from the earth, re-radiating the infrared light, some of which heads back towards the earth. Nitrogen has huge concentrations in the atmosphere (almost 70%) yet it is almost entirely inert (it doesn't do anything).
One important thing to mention (plainly and others) is that annual changes in the weather, like a really hot summer, or winter with no snow, are not good indicators of global warming. What you need to look at is the trend in annual average temperatures, like this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Instrumental_Temperature_Record.png
so that you can see the overall climatic shift over hundreds of years (way more than your lifetime). There are other climatic effects (like El Niño/La Niña) that can cause annual variation (like the really cold winter in the continental US this year), but these are only on a decadal timescale which is why there are all those little bumps in the temperature chart.
The polar bear issue may be something over exaggerated, since polar bears have been shown to be able to adapt to climate change (talk to Nikita Ovsyanikov, russian polar bear scientist). But there are other major issues associated with climate change which do affect people on the scale of hundreds of thousands or even millions: with sea level and storm intensity and frequency rising, we're likely to see more storms like Katrina (which did an awful lot of damage), like the cyclone in Burma right now, and others, which are displacing and killing thousands in the poorest countries in the world. Most of Bangladesh, for example, is at sea level and at extremely high risk of any storm or sea level change.
In drier parts of the world, like australia, the water supplies for major cities like Perth, Melbourne and Sydney are dwindling in large part due to climate change, and if more efficient water use and catchment policies are not enacted, millions of people will be affected.
Hopefully this gives a little bit of insight on the issue, which is really much more complicated than any news outlet pretends.
I welcome further comments or questions.