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.

 

Largest Climate March in history on 09/21 in NYC to put pressure on world leaders at UN Climate Summ

page: 6
13
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 10:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

A google search produced more than what the Blaze had offered.
Again, cool story.

Have fun marching, while others work.




posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 10:40 AM
link   
They are butt-hurt that their terror of minorities, immigration, and socio-economic equitability and social justice is not shared by both half of the US and the majority of the WORLD. They are butt-hurt that issues such as the environment are not just supported by "lib-tards" but also people flying in from all over the world and having rallies in other countries.

As has been said before, "reality has a liberal bias."


originally posted by: Grimpachi

originally posted by: Kali74
I think it's sad that trolls (appropriate) want to make fun of activists which they do based on perceptions gained second hand but given the chance to hear from their own mouths, they don't take it.

Same with the science, we read all these mocking statements about the science and what bloggers claim scientists say but when given the chance to read actual papers... nope.

You're not interested in reality, circle jerks are more fun, right?


Don't mind them Kali it looks like they are simply but hurt over the turnout. Rally envy if you may. Can't really blame them since there rallies have been flop after flop I am sure they have had to tell themselves things like it was the weather or blame the public for being apathetic to causes and here they see no it was simply because their cause sucked. They are loud and like to circle jerk on here but the fringe is like that.

Some people you will never reach but in all honesty some of them you are better off not reaching because if they were to join in they would also bring along their crazy crap that would discredit the cause by association. Think about it do you really want groups like the birthers backing these things? Of course that isn't everyone opposed to this issue but I see a couple of them posting here.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 10:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

A google search produced more than what the Blaze had offered.
Again, cool story.

Have fun marching, while others work.



The march was on a Sunday dude, and most of those people are employed. You know, like the Secretary General of the UN who took off his Sunday afternoon to march?

You just pulled the fallacious "You are protesting something I don't know much about or agree on, so therefore get a job and shower hippy." It is a logical fallacy in two ways: 1) You have no idea the status of people protesting and their employment 2) None of that would address the issue being marched for.

I bet if you were alive in the 1960's you would have said the same about Civil Rights marchers. "Hey MLK Jr., why don't you take a shower and get a job hippy!!!!"
edit on 22-9-2014 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 10:48 AM
link   

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
This vid says it all when it comes to celeb's speaking out . It's all about the money and like you say if it was a genuine concern the police state and msm would be going against it . As it stands msm in their one sided look at the issue fail big time .
a reply to: dreamingawake




Here is a more nuanced and more accurate viewpoint: Some celebrities and leaders jump on bandwagons for either PR or monetary reasons. Whereas many others do so for other motives such as service or activism, just like many normal citizens.

See how generalities are so limited? Do you really think that ALL celebrities only speak to issues when money is involved?
edit on 22-9-2014 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 10:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

I never stated to get a job. I said work.

And the search results showed a heavy presence of Socialists and Communists.

And to compare this crap to MLK jr is pretty disgusting.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: macman
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

I never stated to get a job. I said work.

And the search results showed a heavy presence of Socialists and Communists.

And to compare this crap to MLK jr is pretty disgusting.


You still used a fallacious dismissal, which you need to know not only is illogical but also very offensive.

Again, it was on a Sunday, you know, a weekend activity?

Perhaps you think that people watching football is somehow more mature and responsible.

As to the march, the point still stands, people like you said the same thing about the anti-war protests both in the 60's/70's and with the Iraq War. Instead of actually addressing the issue raised, people who are trying to stay in their comfort zone will attempt to dismiss or characterize the marchers as some kind of fringe or radical group, or use the job arguments. Logical fallacies all.
edit on 22-9-2014 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 11:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

While truth is offensive, it shall still stand.

The weekend is not exactly a time for most to relax.

And it is soooo fantastic the UN leader took time away from his "busy" UN schedule to talk about this.

And comparing this BS to civil rights is about as offensive as it gets.

Those participating in the march spoke volumes.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 11:19 AM
link   
Of course there are lots to the climate that we don't know about and so the science is not settled . There is also much work being done in trying to unravel some of the tricky hockey stick moves pulled off by the team .

The WMO figure makes one more appearance in the CG dossier. In a remarkable letter, worth reproducing in full, late George Kukla writes in January 2001 to Keith Briffa, in which Kukla asked Briffa about the inconsistency between the WMO presentation of the data and the decline shown in Briffa’s technical papers, describing the WMO presentation as “not very responsible”:
Dear Keith,
You are the only guy who may know what was and is going on in the northern forests. With respect to that I do not think that the WMO statement # 913 on the status of the global climate in 1999 is a sufficiently reliable last word. For one thing: the curve attributed to you doesn’t seem to jive with any of the figures of your 2000 QSR paper. Where from did they get the 0.6 degree departure at 1600 AD?
Another problem: the ring density and width in the last several decades are both decreasing which at any other
time would be interpretted as a sign of cooling. So why is it shown in the WMO report as an unprecedented warming? As you properly discuss in your papers we just do not know how exactly do the tree rings relate to weather. In my understanding we are left with the following options:
1) The calibrations of the rings to temperature prior to 1950 are biased, possibly due to the poor coverage of temperature stations.
2) Something other than the temperature influenced the trees in the last several decades and we do not know what.
In either case it is not very responsible to relate the curves to global climate as WMO has done. You are saying it, albeit somehow indirectly but pretty clearly, in all your papers. Unfortunately it appears that these are tooo long for WMO to read.
Ciao and greetings to everyone down there!
George
I think it’s fair to say that George Kukla was first to spot the Hide-the-Decline.
climateaudit.org... a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 11:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Calling the AGW folks Socialist/Communists might be imprecise, but it is not illogical.

The solutions to AGW are all governmentally based. That means progressive by definition, because the progressives use government to solve all of their problems.

Progressive, collectivist, communist, socialist are all more the same than different. They are like different types of secular Christianity. Holy book and everything.

A person marching for a governmental solution to, anything, is a socialist collectivist progressive.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 11:24 AM
link   
Seeing that us humans were not born with fur and wouldn't fair well in our natural environment we end up using our brains to make fire to cook and keep warm .Now it is true that in some places they actually burn dung for their fire we in the west have lots of trees, coal, oil and gas that can be used . You wouldn't begrudge someone of burning their dung now would you ? a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 11:24 AM
link   
No, that is also a blanket generality.

There are number of solutions, ranging from private sector to government.

As to the international community, yes, governments and multi-lateral orgs have to and are addressing it. What do you think, that San Francisco or Chevron are going to magically address a global challenge?


originally posted by: Semicollegiate
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Calling the AGW folks Socialist/Communists might be imprecise, but it is not illogical.

The solutions to AGW are all governmentally based. That means progressive by definition, because the progressives use government to solve all of their problems.

Progressive, collectivist, communist, socialist are all more the same than different. They are like different types of secular Christianity. Holy book and everything.

A person marching for a governmental solution to, anything, is a socialist collectivist progressive.




posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 11:26 AM
link   
No, you are just using offensive dismissals that are clearly illogical.

Most people, conservative or not, engage in a variety of activities on off-days. Marching for an important issue is a more powerful activity than 90% of people's free time activities. So you area biased towards the movement, not actually people doing free-time Sunday activities.

Second, yes, the UN SG has an immensely busy schedule, as do most of us. It shows character, not vice, to take time on a day off to show up for a serious issue. Climate change is a major topic on the UN and Secretary-General's agenda THIS WEEK at the Climate Summit, which you would know if you were educated on the issues. So for myself and the SG, THIS IS PART OF OUR WORK. We work in global development. So we ARE doing work-related activities on a Sunday.

It is the people without values and character who cannot be bothered to do anything for the community.

As to the Civil Rights and anti-war movements, my point is still on point, that people like you will fight tooth and nail any threat and challenge to the traditional social order, no matter how war-like, racist, or environmentally destructive that order is. You will dismiss all of it with logical fallacies.

Given your current attitude, I surmised that you are like the other conservatives who also put down and railed against those hippy protestors during the Civil Rights and war movements. If the shoe fits..


originally posted by: macman
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

While truth is offensive, it shall still stand.

The weekend is not exactly a time for most to relax.

And it is soooo fantastic the UN leader took time away from his "busy" UN schedule to talk about this.

And comparing this BS to civil rights is about as offensive as it gets.

Those participating in the march spoke volumes.

edit on 22-9-2014 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-9-2014 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-9-2014 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-9-2014 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)

edit on 22-9-2014 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 11:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Bud....you have Socialist and Communists directly tied to this.

But, again, cool story.

Love how you equate this crap to civil rights. Very Progressive of you.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 12:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Quetzalcoatl14
No, that is also a blanket generality.

There are number of solutions, ranging from private sector to government.

As to the international community, yes, governments and multi-lateral orgs have to and are addressing it. What do you think, that San Francisco or Chevron are going to magically address a global challenge?


originally posted by: Semicollegiate
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Calling the AGW folks Socialist/Communists might be imprecise, but it is not illogical.

The solutions to AGW are all governmentally based. That means progressive by definition, because the progressives use government to solve all of their problems.

Progressive, collectivist, communist, socialist are all more the same than different. They are like different types of secular Christianity. Holy book and everything.

A person marching for a governmental solution to, anything, is a socialist collectivist progressive.



Non-socialists are too alarmed by the Carbon Tax to participate in a Global Warming march.

Why don't collectivists totalitarians admit that they are collectivist totalitarians?



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 12:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Is nothing more and nothing less than a mass parade of alternative fuel advertisements from many of the various entrepreneurs looking for endorsements from Wall Street

Have fun people.

Is always money to be made.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 01:09 PM
link   
Interesting, beside the native Americans telling their concern about what has been done to their lands, that is all legit and real, In the weather channel they admitted that about 300 groups of alternative fuels "pushers", I man proponents were part of the mass "parade" organization.

Yeah, 300 groups eagle to catch on the "global warming" pandemic and they don't care if the funding to their "ideas" to "save the world" means taxing and using tax payers dollars for it.

Have fun people

Is always money to be made.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 05:26 PM
link   
I have no idea what to think of this...

Rockefellers turn their backs on oil


The wealthy American oil family Rockefeller puts no more money in fossil fuels. Together with with other organizations The Rockefellers are cutting interests with $ 50 billion, because they see no future in the oil and coal industries anymore.

The Rockefellers have joined a campaign in which more than 800 investors are involved. These include universities, cities, churches and health organizations.

"If John were alive today, he would invest in clean energy," say the descendants of John D. Rockefeller, whose as an oil pioneer earned billions.

Source
edit on 22-9-2014 by BornAgainAlien because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 05:49 PM
link   
a reply to: BornAgainAlien

What that tells you, money to be made and it doesn't matter from where as long as is somebody else to profit from.

Taking into consideration the big tax payers payoff that Obama did to push the clean air act and gave away to his buddies in that business, all of them went bankrupt, the losers were not them it was us the tax payers that paid for the ventures.

The elite is not in the business of losing, that is why they have the working class for it.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 05:58 PM
link   
Of the thousands that marched I have but one simple question of them.
How many drove to the protest?
I think we already know the answer.............



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 06:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cynic
Of the thousands that marched I have but one simple question of them.
How many drove to the protest?
I think we already know the answer.............


But what's the point of your question?

This is about governments taking a bigger role. Who cares who drove what where? I drive to work even though I supported this protest. I didn't have a choice. We do what we can. Small things can have big effects. We have to start somewhere.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join