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.

 

Obama mocks climate skeptics at LCV dinner

page: 5
13
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2014 @ 04:35 AM
link   
Ha ha ha! Gotta love the advocates of Climate Change! What a load of Rubbish. Climate Change doesn't exist. It's called a SOLAR CYCLE and the idiots in Government are simply cashing in on it by creating more control, taking more freedoms away and taxing people to hell!

If you want to control the population more sell them a lie and repeat that lie over and over again and throw in some falsified data! That's what they are doing with the Climate Change lie! They are falsifying data and omitting data. Like how it was hotter in the Medieval times than it is now! And if I remember rightly there weren't a lot of cars or farting cows back then!

Good Old Al Gore is having a hard time promoting his Global Warming Lie. Just recently he went to Canberra in Australia trying to convince the Aussies. Unfortunately he didn't bank on freezing temperatures and snow when it supposed to be warm and sunny! Lol



And it seems Agenda 21 has changed it's name I see!


Climate change was created by the Club of Rome who stated that “in searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention and thus the real enemy, then, is humanity itself believed humanity requires a common motivation, namely a common adversary in order to realize world government. It does not matter if this common enemy is a real one or one invented for the purpose.”

Eco-fascists have begun a 10 year initiative that strengthens partnerships between governments, alarmist scientists and investors to develop “opportunities of global environmental change and support transformation towards global sustainability in the coming decades.” This new scheme is called Future Earth.


Future Earth - Rebranding Agenda 21 for Enviromental Control

It's all about Control. It's not about the Climate. 9/11 and 7/7 were the same. Control and taking your freedom's away piece by piece and getting to War with Iraq and Afghanistan. They need an excuse to do it. Problem-Reaction-Solution. 9/11 and 7/7 were the perfect examples. And they tried it with Syria with the Fake Chemical Weapons attack by the Rebels blaming it on Assad's forces. Fortunately the sheeple didn't fall for the lie this time. So they are behind on their quest for creation of the One World Government (New World Order). Hence all this ISIS crap now!

I despair when I see and hear people agreeing with those Government Mouthpieces. They are trying to Kill you! Not help you!

Sheesh!

Lol at people who believe Climate Change Exists!





posted on Jun, 28 2014 @ 06:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: mbkennel


Do you remember just after 9-11 when there was all kinds of video evidence floating around explaining how the official story may not have been the way things really happened? Then, all of the sudden, the government took the stance that if you question any part of the story, you are siding with the terrorists, and you are unamerican.


Examples, please.

Personally I think the 9/11 conspiracy theories are also nuts and unjustified, but the evidence for climate change and human influence thereof is far stronger still.



Examples. Of how people questioned the official story of 9-11. Um....no. I'll give you a hint. (the 9-11 forum right here)

And this isn't about 9-11, I just used that as an example of how the "don't question my authority" game is played. You know, like you are playing now.

Questions lead to answers. You would think folks with science in mind would welcome questions. Why are you so against them?

and if the science was settled, as seems to be said a lot, then wouldn't 100% of scientist be on board?

Things that make you go Hmmm.



posted on Jun, 28 2014 @ 09:14 AM
link   
a reply to: Hilux1996

This is not a government issue. Al Gore has nothing to do with this. We are responsible for a plethora of environmental disasters on this planet.

It amazes me that so many turn a blind eye to man made worldly problems because this issue has become a political mudslinging fest. The climate change problem is a worldly problem.

The 280 to 400ppm increase of CO2 is a real figure, a 40% rise as a result of human activity. It is not just CO2 that is a problem. We have cut down a huge amount of forests, we have also polluted much of our fresh water supply, the list of human destruction on Earth is a long one.

Keep up with the elementary school arguments against climate change. Our climate, our atmosphere's chemistry is changing as a result of human activity.

To deny this reality is truly living in the dark.


And for the record: while the US had a long cold winter which prompted many to denounce global warming, Australia had record breaking heat waves all summer long. Obviously someone is not familiar with the weather/climate trends in the land down under.
edit on 28-6-2014 by jrod because: aaarrrrr



posted on Jun, 28 2014 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Greven

So what are you doing about it?



posted on Jun, 28 2014 @ 09:48 AM
link   
a reply to: jrod

I'm gonna use network dude's Hmmmm factor.


Scientists at two of the world’s leading climate centres - NASA and NOAA - have been caught out manipulating temperature data to overstate the extent of the 20th century "global warming


Why would they be manipulating figures if it was actually true about Climate Change?


When the raw data is used, there is little if any evidence of global warming and some evidence of global cooling. However, once the data has been adjusted - ie fabricated by computer models - 20th century 'global warming' suddenly looks much more dramatic.


Nooooo. Can't be. Why would NASA do that? I know they Lie about a lot of things but to lie and make up the Global Warming theory? And remember it is still a 'Club Of Rome' theory or fabrication if the truth be told!


This is especially noticeable on the US temperature records. Before 2000, it was generally accepted - even by climate activists like NASA's James Hansen - that the hottest decade in the US was the 1930s.
As Hansen himself said in a 1989 report:
In the U.S. there has been little temperature change in the past 50 years, the time of rapidly increasing greenhouse gases — in fact, there was a slight cooling throughout much of the country.


Did he say 'COOLING'?


However, Hansen subsequently changed his tune when, sometime after 2000, the temperatures were adjusted to accord with the climate alarmists' fashionable "global warming" narrative. By cooling the record-breaking year of 1934, and promoting 1998 as the hottest year in US history, the scientists who made the adjustments were able suddenly to show 20th century temperatures shooting up - where before they looked either flat or declining.


Me thinks somebody suddenly got a big bonus. Or his wife and kids have been tied to a chair?

Global Warming Fabricated by NASA and NOAA



Some seem to be!!



posted on Jun, 28 2014 @ 09:51 AM
link   
a reply to: Hilux1996

Please read my previous posts on this topic. I think you are missing the point of my post. Nothing you have written or posted holds up to the scientific standard.

Nice tactic using the emotional angle to make your point. Science has no emotion.

This is not about global warming to me. It is about the changes human activity is making to the environment.

The changes are making this planet less habitable.
edit on 28-6-2014 by jrod because: yep



posted on Jun, 28 2014 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: jrod




This is not about global warming to me.


Considering you post on every Global Warming/Climate Change thread on ATS, I can safely say it is about global warming to you.



posted on Jun, 28 2014 @ 10:05 AM
link   
a reply to: jrod

Seems like maybe you only read a few choice words of my post, so to save time I'll just quote from myself the bits you missed.

"I certainly doubt that the changes are TOTALLY man-made" meaning I'm not switching teams, as you assert. In fact, I'm not playing a bloody game at all. Your response is just what I needed to prove my point. By the way, propaganda can ALSO be the truth, it's a very old technique.

"people who do not question the motives behind the given information band together in a dangerous way, making navigating the truth like running through a mine field of personal attacks. "

I'm not questioning the official story, I'm questioning WHY the original story is what it is.

So if the time for now is action, what actions are you taking?



posted on Jun, 28 2014 @ 10:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Euphem

Because this is something I studied when I went to college. Because this issue unlike the vast majority of issues discussed has worldly ramifications.

There is a problem with our planet's health and I refuse to close the blinds and pretend everything is going to be okay.

a reply to: kismetpair927
How many time are you or one of your clones going to ask me that question? Those questions are answered in my previous posts on climate change.

Global warming over the last 100 years or so cannot be proved or disproved, it has been used as a distraction and for political gain. No side can win the argument, which is exactly the kind of debate the puppet masters want the peasants to engage in.
edit on 28-6-2014 by jrod because: 1



posted on Jun, 28 2014 @ 10:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Euphem

Considering you post on every Global Warming/Climate Change thread on ATS, I can safely say it is about global warming to you.


Please find a post where I support the global warming claims. It almost seems like you are trying to put words in my mouth.

I pick my words carefully on these threads. Unlike 99% of those who chime in on these threads, I actually have taken university level classes on this and can cite several PHDs to back up the facts and data I present.

To sit around and pretend everything is going to be alright while the CO2 concentrations soar is not an option to me.
edit on 28-6-2014 by jrod because: 1



posted on Jun, 28 2014 @ 10:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: Euphem

Because this is something I studied when I went to college. Because this issue unlike the vast majority of issues discussed has worldly ramifications.

There is a problem with our planet's health and I refuse to close the blinds and pretend everything is going to be okay.

a reply to: kismetpair927
How many time are you or one of your clones going to ask me that question? Those questions are answered in my previous posts on climate change.

Global warming over the last 100 years or so cannot be proved or disproved, it has been used as a distraction and for political gain. No side can win the argument, which is exactly the kind of debate the puppet masters want the peasants to engage in.



So,if global warming cannot be proved or disproved,why are you trying to prove it?



posted on Jun, 28 2014 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: Sunwolf

Nope.

Way off. Try again.

Please find 1 post where I 'try to prove global warming' before making such a claim.
edit on 28-6-2014 by jrod because: ahhhh, getting attacked by clones



posted on Jun, 28 2014 @ 10:31 AM
link   
Why are you a proponent then?



posted on Jun, 28 2014 @ 10:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: Hilux1996

Please read my previous posts on this topic. I think you are missing the point of my post. Nothing you have written or posted holds up to the scientific standard.

Nice tactic using the emotional angle to make your point. Science has no emotion.

This is not about global warming to me. It is about the changes human activity is making to the environment.

The changes are making this planet less habitable.


I suppose you could say Humans are changing the Environment. HAARP, Geo-Engineering with Chem-trailing and the constant Wars they are always starting! Not Humans per-say! But certain humans within Agenda 21 and Codex Alimentarius aka the Governments. Actually I wouldn't call them Human.

But as far as the data goes to suggest this planet is warming up? That's a crock of sh*t! The planet cools and heats up all the time. 'They' manipulate the data to say that the planet has always been heating when in actual fact it is not.

'They' then come out with falsified data and tell you it is you the population that is warming the planet. Then they tax you more. And back all that up with useless and manipulated data. Scientists that know what is going on and after speaking out about it have either been fired, disappeared or silenced in one way or another. And the scientists that are paid to agree? Just look at how much money they have earned from lying to the population.

If Obama is Promoting The Lie so vigorously then you know it is a Lie! He is NOT doing it for your health or to help you!



posted on Jun, 29 2014 @ 10:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kaploink
The problem with deniers that many tend to hold faith based beliefs. So, no matter how much scientific evidence is shown, they simply will not believe it. The polar ice caps could melt, the sea levels could rise, the average global temperature could substantially increase and yet they would still deny global warming.

Frankly, they deserve as much ridicule as the anti vaccine folks, the chem trails folks, and the people that believe men walked with dinosaurs.

This part is hilarious to me, because while God said He wouldn't drown the Earth again - He never said anything about stopping mankind from doing it.

And sea levels are most certainly increasing.



posted on Jun, 29 2014 @ 11:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Euphem
a reply to: Greven

So what are you doing about it?

Are you attempting to paint me as a hypocrite? Naive.

I try to be as efficient in my energy use as possible. I drive only as much as necessary, and only then because there is no public transportation to speak of where I live.

I recycle - did you know raw aluminum processing accounts for around 5% of the total U.S. electrical energy consumption, and that the energy cost to recycle an equivalent amount of aluminum is about 5% of the cost to refine it?

Do you also, if you watch a TV show or play a video game or read a book, rewrite and publish your own revisions when you critique them?



posted on Jun, 29 2014 @ 11:07 AM
link   
a reply to: Hilux1996

The 400ppm and rising CO2 count is not falsified data. We have observed a 40% increase in CO2 in the atmosphere as a result of the industrial revolution. This trend has been observed for decades now, Obama has nothing to do with this fact.

Please do a little research before making outlandish claims.



posted on Jun, 29 2014 @ 11:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer
a reply to: network dude

The man-made-climate-change skeptics, are a brave lot.

They (we) are under pressure from the media, from politicians, from social media to jump on the bandwagon and join the in crowd.

Perhaps they (we) are the last critical thinkers left.

We question the models.
We question the data collection.
We question the motives behind such "science".

When intimidation doesn't work, they use insults to poke at those of us who don't just lap up whatever dross is dished out to all of us.



It's great to question - question everything. But whose bandwagon are you riding on? Or are you doing your own ice core research? If you have a group of very intelligent people who comprise about 98% of experts in a field, and then you have the other 2% of supposedly intelligent people telling you the opposite - who are going to believe? And why? I find it remarkable the total imbalance that the "consensus" represents in the scientific field, and yet the AGW skeptic crowd represents likely a good majority of a certain party. I can't find any other explanation for the unreasonable denial than party adherence, or groupthink. It's certainly not logical nor is it rational.



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: redtic

I can only speak for myself, but, your 98% figure, Where did you get that? See, at this point I am not sure what to believe, but if you need to lie to me to get me on your side, then I really, really need to think about why you would do that. I realize there is lots of data, but there is also lots of contradictions. Since the global climate change didn't happen overnight, it doubt it's science will be settled overnight either. We need more time for your models to get a bit clearer on what they show. We need to see what the climate will do in the next few years.

In the mean time, why don't we all try to find a better fuel source? A cleaner one.



posted on Jul, 9 2014 @ 05:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: redtic

I can only speak for myself, but, your 98% figure, Where did you get that?


www.abovetopsecret.com...

in addition to the Cook study...

iopscience.iop.org...



See, at this point I am not sure what to believe, but if you need to lie to me to get me on your side, then I really, really need to think about why you would do that. I realize there is lots of data, but there is also lots of contradictions. Since the global climate change didn't happen overnight, it doubt it's science will be settled overnight either.


"Settled" is a strong word in science. Let's just say there's an overwhelming amount of data and corroborated evidence that validates the theory of AGW.



We need more time for your models to get a bit clearer on what they show. We need to see what the climate will do in the next few years.


Time, yes - I suppose only time will prove anyone 100% correct.



In the mean time, why don't we all try to find a better fuel source? A cleaner one.


That, I can agree with.







 
13
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join