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.

 

Global Warming ? Not convinced.

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

I suggest that you open your eyes.

No lies. Just science. 280ppm to 400ppm CO2 rise is verified. Your catchy graphics do not disprove this FACT.

If science does not agree with your ideals, it is not the science that is flawed.
edit on 21-6-2014 by jrod because: truly infinate....




posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 02:06 PM
link   
a reply to: mysterioustranger

while natural cycles do occur. I don't think it would be particularly pleasant to have our major costal cities swallowed by the ocean. in addition to the millions of other costal residents getting displaced.

Miami will be like venice, while venice will be like atlantis. (in a best-case scenario)

a reply to: Greywolf13A

The Y2K-thing was mostly about accounting/banking/book-keeping software, as dates were stored in only two digits, turned out not to be a problem as digital records didn't go back further than the 1950's. the hype was mostly created by the media, and computer scientists/software engineers who either A. saw it a genuine concern; or B. an opportunity to sell software/do matience work, and/or hysteria from realizing that much of the world economy relies upon accounting/banking software.

edit on 21-6-2014 by NonsensicalUserName because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 03:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: xuenchen

I suggest that you open your eyes.

No lies. Just science. 280ppm to 400ppm CO2 rise is verified. Your catchy graphics do not disprove this FACT.

If science does not agree with your ideals, it is not the science that is flawed.


Still rejected.

the CO2 measurements are flawed.

and 400ppm isn't enough to do any damage. If this causes some kind of global warming, then all the ice should have melted away by now.

It's a Science/Banker scam.

And why haven't they installed CO2 capturing equipment on all CO2 emitting smoke stacks yet?

If the entire world was in grave danger, why haven't they fixed it yet?

I thought all these scientists and leaders were smart? Oh wait. They are smart. They get paid big money to ring the sirens and stoke the fires.



posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 03:20 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod

CO2 is BS. You should be looking at dams and water ways being reconnected from their natural resources.

commonsensecanadian.ca...

www.theverge.com...

Be aware that US invites anyone who is not a so called communist. This means rich business men all over the world can run to America and have their own projects. That is Capitalism at its best work. Everyone is worried about jobs rather than environmental.
edit on 21-6-2014 by makemap because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 04:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen

Still rejected.

the CO2 measurements are flawed.
BS conjecture

and 400ppm isn't enough to do any damage. If this causes some kind of global warming, then all the ice should have melted away by now.

flawed if then logic

It's a Science/Banker scam.The common people are getting scammed, science has nothing to do with shady economics

And why haven't they installed CO2 capturing equipment on all CO2 emitting smoke stacks yet? dreamy question, what is your level of chemistry education?

jrod



Please stop rejecting science.

This is the 21st century. The numbers have been verified over and over again. 400ppm and rising is a valid C02 count for the northern hemisphere. The significant measurable rise is directly caused by humans burning fossil fuels and destroying nature's CO2 sinks.

The ones with the most to lose with righting the CO2 problem and other environmental disasters man is currently creating are also some of the world's largest industries. They have the power and resources to spread the propaganda and fund pseudoscience studies often in their own self accredited 'scientific' journals to back their claims.

We do not need the oil industry, we have the technology to produce sufficient power without relying on fossil fuels. That industry among others have created a world wide oligarchy that fights to protect their profits. The do not care about the environment and use their wealth and power to create laws that protect their interests.

Big money creates the pseudoscience and straw-man arguments that the majority of self proclaimed conservatives fall trap to.

Do not try to discredit what I am writing. I have studied meteorology and atmospheric chemistry, real classes that required advanced math as a preReq....

I try to be a cynic in these kind of issues. Cynicism is not part of any agenda.
edit on 21-6-2014 by jrod because:
aarrrr



posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 07:09 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod


Please stop rejecting science.
Negative. Still Rejected.

The "scientists" are responsible for all the biggest boondoggles in history.





Big money creates the pseudoscience and straw-man arguments that the majority of self proclaimed conservatives fall trap to.
And bigger money creates the initial lies and financial scams.

Many scams are based on Hegelian Dialectics.


Rejected.




It's the Sun



posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 08:10 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod

They are the new flat earthers so until it smacks them in the face they will continue to deny science.

Unless you are just bored and killing time it is useless to debate that bunch.



posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 09:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Grimpachi

I've noticed. Denial, reject science, blame environmentalism on a 'liberal' agenda......

That side refuses to accept reality, science, and have no basis for their blind ignorance. Furthermore that side takes what I write as a personal attack, or an attack against their religion.

It is cute when they use catchy graphics, catchy phrases, and present pseudoscience as fact. Writing rejected in all caps and large font will not change what has been proven by science.
edit on 21-6-2014 by jrod because: 123



posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 09:24 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod

Not that I disagree with you fully, but every single day old science is proven false by new science.

Man is flawed, and has a terrible memory. People are very easily swayed by emotion, and time spent on certain endeavors. When you have so much riding on something like AGW, even the most intelligent of people are manipulated into a false paradigm.

Religious extremists all throughout history have thought they were truly making the world a better place. Whether it was the crusades, or the now constant suicide bombings.

I ask you jrod, what are you doing to make the world a better place?



posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 09:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Euphem
Not true. Science is based on facts and discovering the mysteries of our existence. While ideas that were widely accepted in the past often are proven false by science, science it self does not change. Our knowledge continues to improve yet there are so many who refuse to accept the reality of the 21st century.

I've lived off the grid for over 3 years is a start....

Participating in forums like this can actually have a worldly impact.

I do not have the money nor the resources to take on the oligarchy alone.
edit on 21-6-2014 by jrod because: blah...



posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 10:04 PM
link   
Here's a view about some of the Bankers involved with the Global Climate Hoax.

Familiar names in all the "Green" ways.



Al Gore and his carbon credit huckstering partner David Blood, both principals at Generation Investment Management (GIM), warn in their October 30 Wall Street Journal op/ed feature of peril to fossil fuel investments due to “The Coming Carbon Asset Bubble”. They argue that such “unwise and increasingly wreck less” investment strategies pose three broad risks which will cause carbon assets to become “stranded” and lose economic value: through direct government carbon regulation; as a result of market-share losses to “already competitive” renewable technologies; and due to “sociopolitical pressures” causing carbon-intensive businesses to lose their “license to operate”.

Blood And Gore: Making A Killing On Anti-Carbon Investment Hype



and a snapshot of Al's big money "investment" firm....


Generation was founded in 2004[1] by Al Gore and David Blood and began investing client money in April 2005. With offices in London and New York, [1] the firm employs 55 people.[2] Generation's Advisory Board, convened by Gore, helps set Generation's long-term thematic research agenda into global sustainability and renewable energy issues.

Past areas of focus have included climate change, poverty and development, ecosystem services and biodiversity, water scarcity, pandemics, demographics and migration, and urbanization.

In November 2007, Generation and Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers (KPCB) announced a global collaboration to "find, fund and accelerate green business, technology and policy solutions with the greatest potential to help solve the current climate crisis."[3] As part of the collaboration, prominent KPCB Partner John Doerr joined Generation's Advisory Board.

Generation Investment Management

"Past areas of focus have included climate change, poverty and development, ecosystem services and biodiversity, water scarcity, pandemics, demographics and migration, and urbanization."

LOL -Oh the profits from all the Human misery !!!!

Corporatism at it's finest indeed



posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 10:06 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod

Science is based on facts. Whether you want to use ignorant rhetoric or not, ideas based on science that are widely accepted as science, IS science.

Sure the scientific models remain the same and they should, but that isn't what I was talking about.

I do find it strange though. I have participated in a few threads with you where little to no stars are given to anybody. However, doing the math you have received an average of 380 stars PER comment.

Given that I have witnessed a good 40 of those comments receive maybe 20 stars total we can increase that ratio even higher.

Is there another way to receive stars? Or do you have a bunch of threads with like 1000+ star comments that I have yet to witness?



posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 10:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Euphem

There are a few threads that address the star issue. It is largely because the first 5 years or so I was on ATS there was not a star and flag system so myself and many others have had a glitch to adjust our count. It is still a mystery to me why the count is what it is. It is not relevant to this thread.....

Ignorant rhetoric, that is a one way to describe my writing style....

400ppm CO2 count and rising......Fact.

I have not once in this thread mentioned global warming.


edit on 21-6-2014 by jrod because: 1



posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 10:15 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod

Well considering the title starts with "Global Warming" maybe you should get with the program.

Sounds like you are already familiar with rigging the statistics in your favor...

No wonder you love the IPCC and AGW so much...you can easily relate.



posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 10:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Euphem

No, I just educated myself for the most part. I am not part of a 'program' and I am not one to blindly follow a herd.

I can link some of my past college professors, I dropped out a decade ago but I did take and pass advanced classes in meteorology and atmospheric chemistry.

Those silly little arguments and play with words have no affect on the facts I present.

Keep trying!

CO2 is at 400ppm and rising as a direct result of human addiction to burning fossil fuels.

edit on 21-6-2014 by jrod because: 1



posted on Jun, 21 2014 @ 10:23 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 23 2014 @ 12:30 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod

www.ijreview.com...


cash for me, but not for Thee theory...



posted on Jun, 23 2014 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Greywolf13A

Sounds like this guy Tom Steyer is a real beauty indeed.



#3 – He has been called the “Green Superman,” pledging hundreds of millions of dollars to support climate change legislation and prevent climate change deniers from winning office.

#4 – He made most of his fortune off of foreign coal investments, the very energy source he now seeks to take down.



Legislate Legislate Legislate is all we hear about.

And the Bankers keep getting richer.



posted on Jun, 24 2014 @ 03:43 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod

Are/were you an environmentalist? The majority of liberals for the past 40+ years are very much environmentalists. For most of those years they have been fighting nuclear power.

Now I will ask you. Who is really at fault here? If they would have just understood the science of nuclear energy, and not fought nuclear energy every step of the way, we wouldn't have this issue now would we?

So even if AGW is real, you can blame dems/liberals for it.
edit on 24-6-2014 by Euphem because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2014 @ 04:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Euphem
a reply to: jrod

Are/were you an environmentalist? The majority of liberals for the past 40+ years are very much environmentalists. For most of those years they have been fighting nuclear power.


During that time, the evidence for man-made global warming was not as strong and was unknown to the public.



Now I will ask you. Who is really at fault here? If they would have just understood the science of nuclear energy, and not fought nuclear energy every step of the way, we wouldn't have this issue now would we?


The intersection between anti-nuclear activists and professional climate scientists is very small.

Today there is a division, and I personally think that increased nuclear power, though expensive and potentially dangerous, is essential for the next few hundred years to ameliorate rapid climate change.


So even if AGW is real, you can blame dems/liberals for it.


No.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join