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.

 

"Climate Change" Vs. Pollution

page: 1
8

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 12:40 AM
link   
I will admit that I am someone that questions man-made climate change. I know that the climate changes over time and that the earth has been colder and warmer than it is now and will be again in the future. I don't necessarily believe that humans contribute to the change, but I do know for sure that many people are trying to profit from the opportunity and using the idea of climate change to control, suppress and tax.

I will probably never support the climate change agenda, but I am against poisons and toxins in our environment. I am against fluoridated water. I support reducing agricultural waste. I don't know why we don't sell bottled water in cartons (like milk) instead of using plastic bottles. My point is that we have so much common ground that we could be working together on instead of trying to prove climate change to people that are never going to get over "Climategate" and other data manipulation by the "experts".

If we were to begin to address things that we can see and agree upon then I would be onboard. So, what I ask is that climate change folks stop trying to win converts to the man-made climate change agenda and focus on that which we can agree. I offer an olive branch and a chance to work together.

That's my opinion. Your mileage may vary.




posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 12:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

I'm pretty much on the same page as you, although we'll both probably get flamed for not going along with the actual Global Warming propaganda BS

Way back when, before Al Gore and all this carbon tax crap was even heard of, in science class we were taught of Natural Evolution of the Earth

The way it --Earth-- used to be, the way it is/was then, and of course the way it will change in the future
Whether Man is here or not, Mother Earth will always change/evolve

Is Global Change directly all Man's fault? NO....

Is pollution bad for Mother Nature? YES...

Can we do more to help? YES.....

But to make money and profit off of it and use GW as an excuse to tax & fear monger is wrong

Not sure what they teach in school now a days, but it blows my mind when you tell young adults that the Sahara Desert wasn't always a desert and they look at me like WTH, what do you mean?




edit on 23-10-2014 by snarky412 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 12:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

I have expressed the same feeling in another thread last week...
I mean, why debate if climate change is man-made or not? To find someone to blame?

Whatever the answer, it's clear that we should all agree on polluting less instead of dividing ourselves with beliefs.



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 01:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus
It's a nice thought and i have to agree.

But people today don't change before someone dies, just look at Ebola, a year ago nobody cared about ebola, now they do.

IMO i think it's obvious that humans affect climate in many ways.
I mean...

Big cities create local climate bobbles, we do have a lot of big cities.
edit on 23-10-2014 by Mianeye because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 01:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

I'm also environmentally focused on pollution as opposed to "climate gate". It seems though, and we will probably be seeing it here too, that any talk of toxins is quickly derailed with a switch to climate change. Another example of this is talk of pollution from jet liners is sidelined with talk of chemtrails.

IMO, this is by design.

The 'acceptable' subjects seem to be climate and mystery spraying, not pollution.

I just heard yesterday that some pesticide is finally being exposed (finally) for reduced bee populations. That is an interesting discussion here, too.



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 01:20 AM
link   

a reply to: Metallicus
Your mileage may vary.


Car companies + big oil...you lose!

It is quite obvious car companies are working with big oil to keep America and the world dependant on fossil fuels.


Big oil conspiracy

General motors were predicting 80mpg cars back in 1939


catalytic converter conspiracy


State and Federal Gas Taxes Consume 45.9 Cents Per Gallon

The mystery of 100+ mpg cars

That was 20 years ago..........you seriously mean to tell me that the great minds of the auto world have actually managed to go backward from those type of mileages

edit on 23-10-2014 by AttitudeProblem because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 01:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: AttitudeProblem

a reply to: Metallicus
Your mileage may vary.


Car companies + big oil...you lose!

It is quite obvious car companies are working with big oil to keep America and the world dependant on fossil fuels.



catalytic converter conspiracy

State and Federal Gas Taxes Consume 45.9 Cents Per Gallon



I have no problem with moving away from fossil fuels, but it needs to be done in moderation and without affecting the economy and the standard of living of ordinary people. Hopefully the technology will be available at affordable prices in the near future, but as you alluded to, we shouldn't hold our breath with big oil working against us.
edit on 2014/10/23 by Metallicus because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 01:33 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr




and we will probably be seeing it here too, that any talk of toxins is quickly derailed with a switch to climate change.


It can not be derailed as most of OP is talk about climate, if he only wanted to talk about the toxins, he should only address that topic.

Now it's a mix of both, and both are a part of the same problem, we don't act we just discuss till we drop dead or something.

We always tend to blame the government because it's easy and they only think economy, but in reality the people are the problem because they individually don't give a #, they just want someone to fix it without they lose anything.
Earth is getting beaten up by us, but she ain't gonna give up without a fight, and she will probably beat the # out of us.
edit on 23-10-2014 by Mianeye because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 01:37 AM
link   
I agree too OP.

As soon as I heard about carbon credits and money entering into the equation...I knew it was a load of crap.

I completely believe that people/companies/countries need to be doing everything to stop pollution and use green energy instead of using crap that destroys the environment etc. But with some people, as soon as you say that you don't believe in GW/Climate change (i've always been annoyed how they changed the buzz word btw) you are labelled as a fool.

That's why I applaud people/companies etc that are doing great work to find solutions to the problem instead of making money off of it.



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 01:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Mianeye


Earth is getting beaten up by us, but she ain't gonna give up without a fight, and she will probably beat the # out of us.


Mother Earth will cleanse herself of us as she needs to
We are like fleas on a dog

Hurricanes, tornadoes, earth quakes, wild fires, tsunami, volcanoes, floods, etc. etc.
Destruction, mayhem and death for us, but not for Her

But yes, we need to cut back on the pollution
Not only for Earth but for our own health risks

Over-population is a problem as well & contributes to the situation, which is topic for another thread I suppose, but something to think about also



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 01:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Cruff

The pool of tax money is used to reduce pollution in the infrastructure, it's not just used on climate studies as many in here believes.

So the carbon tax actually help to some degree, though taxing will never be enough and is silly as a stand alone solution.

The green energy that is possible for us today like wind and solar energy are far from efficient to change anything, they pollute more than they give or equal, in construction and size.

New "green energy" are researched as we speak, paid by you through the government, but there is no easy solution around the corner ( or it's held back, will keep that one open).

The only change that would be effective if we started today, is to give up on some of the luxury we take for granted everyday.
edit on 23-10-2014 by Mianeye because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 02:16 AM
link   
a reply to: snarky412

The "Global Warming propaganda BS" is what it is to the extent of people's interests. If Lockheed makes good on their recent claims to have fusion coming soon, the world will dance with joy when ignition is achieved, and gas prices will crash. The economy will explode in growth. On the other hand, if we have to face tough realities that the cheapest source of energy is destroying life on earth for future generations, than the economy will suffer.

The idea that the latter is impossible is a narcotic you inject yourself with, to keep the juice flowing without having to think of the consequences. Energy is life. Energy is the economy. Energy is growth, and the leaders of all of this have been the providers of energy from the most affordable sources, the fossil fuel companies. Put simply, modern society is what it is because of them, period. This isn't simple, and there are no good and bad guys. But the consequences no one wants to bring up are real too.

Once I was talking to a born again: he said global warming couldn't happen, God wouldn't let it. He was saying that God won't let us make a mess for ourselves, God will clean up any mess we make - if we crap ourselves God will come down and wipe us off. Yet I've never seen this in reality: God gives us challenges and requires us to act, and we deal with the consequences of those choices we make. This is the same kind of situation: The stakes are high and its not as simple as things seem when you inject yourself with the political narcotic of "its all okay, because its good short term for the economy". A lot of things going on today are not okay, and not morally right. That's the dirty truth, that's how it is.



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 02:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Mianeye



The only change that would be effective if we started today, is to give up on some of the luxury we take for granted everyday.


While statements like the above may be true; I am not willing to reduce my quality of life when a bunch of elite will still be living it up while the rest of us suffer with less. I am all for sustainable, low-cost alternatives so long as they preserve my current standard of living or even improve how I live now.



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 02:48 AM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus

I know what you mean.

When i said "we" i meant everybody incl. the government, the rich and the beautiful, but we all know that ain't going to happen.

A collective change is almost impossible...



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 07:34 AM
link   
a reply to: AttitudeProblem


Thanksk for the look down that rabbit hole.

And welcome to ATS!



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 07:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Mianeye

Op's statement:


I will probably never support the climate change agenda, but I am against poisons and toxins in our environment.


Yours:


It can not be derailed as most of OP is talk about climate, if he only wanted to talk about the toxins, he should only address that topic.

Thanks for proving my point.
edit on 23-10-2014 by intrptr because: bb code



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 12:14 PM
link   
The biggest differences between pollution and climate change are;

Carbon Credit Trading;

Taxes;

Regulations.

None of the above will stop global warming.

Yet those are the most focused on issues.




posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 12:29 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Partly true, and lets just call it pollution as it's one big whole, climate change/global warming is one side effect.

Though the real changes that should be made would break the economy and freedom would be gone, so the majority of people actually accept the carbon taxes and regulations as it gives them a false sense of doing something, but everyone knows it not enough.

The real changes would be very drastic, and require tons of work together and trust on each other, and that won't happen as long as economy is running the show.



posted on Oct, 23 2014 @ 10:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Mianeye

If I knew that there was 100% certainty that the money from a carbon tax etc was definitely being used to build green energy plants etc then I would be all for it. By the way, I should've clarified that things like geothermal are much better options to produce craploads of energy. Wind/Solar could certainly still help for certain things though. I'm not sure how good tidal is but I digress..

The major problem I see and that another poster pointed out is that all of these taxes/regulations/trading don't get to the root of the problem with pollution. Scumbag companies will just keep doing what they do and dumping waste everywhere and it's the average joe that suffers as a result.

Also, there does need to be a huge worldwide campaign on how to stop pollution and also have the infrastructure in place for all countries to deal with it effectively. There also has to be jail sentences for companies/people that pollute or by way of inaction pollute our earth.

A small sidenote for example...when I was in Egypt, the preferred method of rubbish disposal was to throw all your crap on the side of the road and set fire to it. This happened all over the place. There needs to be better infrastructure and also education/re-education of the populace of every country.




top topics



 
8

log in

join