It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

House Directs Pentagon To Ignore Climate Change

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 27 2014 @ 04:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: darkbake
a reply to: Spider879

This is a really stupid move made by an ignorant House of Representatives that is not going to benefit anyone in the long run. Global warming is obviously going to happen and people aren't going to be able to pretend it isn't when cities on the American seaside start flooding.

One consequence of global warming has been added potential energy to the oceans used for hurricanes, resulting in more dangerous ones every year.

Not a winning strategy in the long run for the House of Representatives make themselves look like idiots - global warming is going to be one of the biggest issues of the century.

I don't think this is ignorance this is short term thinking based off greed, I believe they think their off-spring can ride this out because they will have the means while others will not.




posted on May, 27 2014 @ 04:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: LDragonFire

Well there is that billionaire out of San Francisco vowing to dedicate millions or billions ( I stopped listening) to refute REPUBLICAN counter theories.

Drawing party lines by the elite to defend a sinkhole of public funds...hmmm

and that s just in recent memory.


You stopped listening so you were unable or unwilling to post what he actually pledged to do.... You are mad at Phage for smashing you in this debate, but you have admitted you "stopped listening" when it comes to those you don't agree with.

So how does you stop listening make me want to believe what you have to say when you have already made up your mind and nothing can shake your beliefs?
edit on 27-5-2014 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-5-2014 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2014 @ 04:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: Spider879




But Tadaman this does not seem like a hunch not when 98% of scientist are saying this thing is real and we have a negative effect on it.

Is it 98 %


Are they sure..absolutely sure? So they can prove it right? without a shadow of a doubt and excluding all other factors by a testable and repeatable process?

yes with a 2% hold-outs it is remarkable that you can find 98% of any community agreeing on one anything.



posted on May, 27 2014 @ 05:57 AM
link   
The climate will inevitably change without our influence.

But what needs to be settled once and for all if we are indeed making things worse. The climate is in a transitional phase at the moment and technically we are still in an ice age, but ice in the polar regions and glaciers are receding so if my second grade science is correct then the earth is warming.

But on the other hand the earth has been known to cool as well. Volcanic winters and solar dormancy throughout recorded history have known to temporarily lower global temperatures, but that's temporarily.

At the end of the day we can ignore the problem at our own peril, personally I think it's better to be safe then sorry and even if the worst case scenario never comes to pass then at least we would've made the world a healthier place to live in.



posted on May, 27 2014 @ 06:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: The_Phantom
Did I just read that right?
A bill to keep the Department of Defense from acting on the United Nation's Agenda 21?


You caught that one too?

So much for Agenda 21 being a conspiracy aye?



posted on May, 27 2014 @ 07:20 AM
link   
a reply to: seeker1963

Agenda 21 is a real program initiated by the UN. The US rejected it a long time ago.
It isn't a conspiracy to crowd people into massive tenement buildings nor a conspiracy to take over the US or the world.

Have you ever read it?



posted on May, 27 2014 @ 07:33 AM
link   
What baffles me is the issue of if the Republicans in the House actually think that they are in any way relevant. I mean, this Congress is going to go down in history as the worst ever, and Boehner as the most calamitously inept Speaker ever.



posted on May, 27 2014 @ 08:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

So now 20 years after all the doom and gloom climate apocalypse predictions...where are we at now?



posted on May, 27 2014 @ 08:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Euphem
a reply to: Phage

So now 20 years after all the doom and gloom climate apocalypse predictions...where are we at now?


We're seeing them start to happen. This is a long-term event.



posted on May, 27 2014 @ 08:20 AM
link   

originally posted by: Euphem
a reply to: Phage

So now 20 years after all the doom and gloom climate apocalypse predictions...where are we at now?


Oh no nothing to see here:


The rising costs of natural disasters

This graph only goes upto 2000 I can only imagine what these costs are today.

Ok edit to add recent data:


Natural disasters have costs....
edit on 27-5-2014 by LDragonFire because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2014 @ 09:18 AM
link   
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Which predictions came true? There has been little to no change over the past 20 years. Climate scientists are worse than religious cult leaders. When their predictions don't come true they make up some other bull# and move on to new sheep they can manipulate.

I like this one -

Claim: “[By] 1995, the greenhouse effect would be desolating the heartlands of North America and Eurasia with horrific drought, causing crop failures and food riots … [By 1996] The Platte River of Nebraska would be dry, while a continent-wide black blizzard of prairie topsoil will stop traffic on interstates, strip paint from houses and shut down computers.” Michel Oppenheimer and Robert H. Boyle, Dead Heat, St. Martin’s Press, 1990. Oppenheimer is the Albert G. Milbank Professor of Geosciences and International Affairs in the Woodrow Wilson School and the Department of Geosciences at Princeton University. He is the Director of the Program in Science, Technology, and Environmental Policy at the Wilson School. He was formerly a senior scientist with the Environmental Defense Fund, the largest non-governmental organization in the U.S. that examines problems and solutions to greenhouse gases.

Data: When asked about these old predictions Oppenheimer stated, “On the whole I would stand by these predictions — not predictions, sorry, scenarios — as having at least in a general way actually come true,” he said. “There’s been extensive drought, devastating drought, in significant parts of the world. The fraction of the world that’s in drought has increased over that period.”

However, that claim is not obviously true. Data from NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center show that precipitation — rain and snow — has increased slightly over the century.

When a Princeton University professor fails to see the incredibly stupid errors of his predictions you know you have serious problems. It amazes me how ignorant the majority of "intelligent" people are.



posted on May, 27 2014 @ 09:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Euphem

Yes people get stuff wrong but you are wrong by saying the temp is not getting higher, the fact is that the climate has changed the temps are getting higher the icecaps are melting.

climate.nasa.gov...

Oh and of course there will be more rain and snow...the more liquid water we have the more snow and rain we have. It will not just be warmer for everyone...places will be colder and some much warmer and drier.
edit on 27-5-2014 by boymonkey74 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 27 2014 @ 09:42 AM
link   
there are enough wealthy interests to continue global warming....after it gets to a "too-late-to-turn-back" point in which even politically, the world as a whole, won't be able to deny it (I think we are there already), the emphasis will shift to "how to live in our new environment". when that happens, the wealthy will benefit from the sale, construction, manufacturing, etc., of equipment and structures that will safeguard against the environmental ravages that were created by them in the first place. all of you people that deny this is happening do not have to worry, because "the denial" continues to this day to be effective.



posted on May, 27 2014 @ 10:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Euphem
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Which predictions came true? There has been little to no change over the past 20 years. Climate scientists are worse than religious cult leaders. When their predictions don't come true they make up some other bull# and move on to new sheep they can manipulate.

I like this one -

Claim: “[By] 1995, the greenhouse effect would be desolating the heartlands of North America and Eurasia with horrific drought, causing crop failures and food riots … [By 1996] The Platte River of Nebraska would be dry, while a continent-wide black blizzard of prairie topsoil will stop traffic on interstates, strip paint from houses and shut down computers.” Michel Oppenheimer and Robert H. Boyle, Dead Heat, St. Martin’s Press, 1990. Oppenheimer is the Albert G. Milbank Professor of Geosciences and International Affairs in the Woodrow Wilson School and the Department of Geosciences at Princeton University. He is the Director of the Program in Science, Technology, and Environmental Policy at the Wilson School. He was formerly a senior scientist with the Environmental Defense Fund, the largest non-governmental organization in the U.S. that examines problems and solutions to greenhouse gases.

Data: When asked about these old predictions Oppenheimer stated, “On the whole I would stand by these predictions — not predictions, sorry, scenarios — as having at least in a general way actually come true,” he said. “There’s been extensive drought, devastating drought, in significant parts of the world. The fraction of the world that’s in drought has increased over that period.”

However, that claim is not obviously true. Data from NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center show that precipitation — rain and snow — has increased slightly over the century.

When a Princeton University professor fails to see the incredibly stupid errors of his predictions you know you have serious problems. It amazes me how ignorant the majority of "intelligent" people are.


Posts like this scare the excrement out of me. The anti-science hysteria is breathtaking.



posted on May, 27 2014 @ 10:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: seeker1963

Agenda 21 is a real program initiated by the UN. The US rejected it a long time ago.


Bush signed off on the A21 policy back in the nineties. Its alive. Just because you dont seem to notice it doesnt mean that its consequences arent whittling away at our freedoms even now.

Climate Change propaganda and Land grabs are great examples of A21s implementation imo.



posted on May, 27 2014 @ 11:22 AM
link   
a reply to: boymonkey74

I didn't say it hasn't changed at all...I said little to no change. Learn to read what people post please.

Also, thanks for the science lesson there regarding rain and snow chief. Maybe you can explain that to the Princeton Professor who doesn't comprehend it.



posted on May, 27 2014 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

What is anti science about it?



posted on May, 27 2014 @ 11:28 AM
link   
The military isn't in the game of fantasy and conjecture.

Take the Man Made Global Warming debate right out of this.

The US Military only sees the problems. Increased Drought and the issue of food and water for millions of troops, reservists and support personnel. Migration and movements of millions of refugees from regions to escape flooding, drought and localized war brought on by said droughts, sea level rise and fossil fuel bickering. Increased heating and cooling costs due to drastic weather change. This means that although the climate may warm some areas of the earth could get incredible cooling due to cold water influx into the oceans etc. Relocation of assets and bases due to sea level rise or border changes due to localized war etc. That's just a few off the top of my head. The military HAS to make contingency plans for this type of stuff. LOL What's wrong with our congress.



posted on May, 27 2014 @ 11:33 AM
link   
Sounds like more BS legislation that makes no sense.

First, I'm missing the logic behind climate change = war. Are people going to be like, "Damn it's hot outside. We should go to war. That should help."

Second, I realize the US Military might not be best equipped to analyze climate change data, but they are in an excellent position to collect it, what with all the bases around the world. So why not let them collect meteorological data and hand if off to the NOAA? Or even better, just make the data public. What's the harm? I'd rather see the military collecting weather data than drone stiking schools and weddings.

On that note, maybe the Democrats can make a counter proposal. Instead of having the military collect weather data, hand the job over to the kings of data collection, the NSA. If climate change is supposed to be a national security issue, then it should be handled by the National Security Agency anyway. I imagine they are getting pretty tired of listening to me order shrimp fried rice and egg drop soup once a week, they might appreciate the change of pace. And I, for one, would love to see them try to waterboard a cloud.



posted on May, 27 2014 @ 12:25 PM
link   

ATTENTION



The topic of the thread is "House Directs Pentagon To Ignore Climate Change". The personal snipes, and comments regarding personal snipes, are to cease.

Please resume discussing the ball, and leave the player alone.




top topics



 
12
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join