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.

 

Forget Climategate: this ‘global warming’ scandal is much bigger

page: 3
48
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 06:19 PM
link   

what does everyone think?


What I think is this. The title of the thread offers "Forget Climategate: this global warming scandal is much bigger".
I do not read climate threads any longer as they, either way, offer more of the same, defending whichever position the OP holds on the issue.

I came into this one because I was intrigued to read about something much bigger than the possible end of civilization due to global climate change or something more than the insidious machinations of the global elite who wish to garner more control over the masses by conning us into trusting them to solve the problems they have fooled us into believing.

And what I think is that this cut and paste article does not offer any indication of something much bigger than the run of the mill accusations presented time and time again.




posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 06:31 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

That's probably my problem from the start, I considered all data. Here are somes of my main issues:

1- CO2 add very little effect in the atmosphere vs water vapor.

2- As CO2 create some "opacification" in the atmosphere at some wavelength like around 10um, it also increase emissivity at those same wavelength, thus cooling effect added to warming effect, witch one dominate?

3- Climate change and changed all the time in the past.

4- CO2 emission from man amount for around 3% of total emission from nature.

5- Warmist changed theirs "tune" when prediction were not meet as expected, it was global warming, then it is climatic change...

6- Warmist proponent use lies and deception to further their agenda, if it was true, why need to make up some stuff and burry others?

7- Warmist organisation like IPCC have an "oil guy" at its head (Pachaury).

8- Strong financial incencitive for the gov.; carbon taxes, carbon market...

9- Hide the decline event.

10- Many publicitized prediction that failed and were later revealed as being with no scientific basis after all; like Melting Himalayan Glaciers, prediction that snow will be something of the past.

11- Strong financial incencitive to oil co.; they are now subsidized for exploitation of low rentability oil well by using CO2 injection, they call it "carbon sequestration".

12- CO2 is plant food, with increasing CO2, biomass will increase.

13- I find a world that is warmer is less problematic than a colder one.

...


edit on 2015-1-30 by PeterMcFly because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 06:39 PM
link   
a reply to: PeterMcFly

I do not have time address all of your list of why you do not believe warming is a reality.

Number 4 sticks out. As a result of our burning of carbon based fuels, CO2 has increased significantly and continues to do so.

The increase of CO2 from 280ppm to 400+ppm is a significant one, and it has been shown that this increase is directly tied to man's habit of burning fuel.

We are changing the atmosphere of this planet!



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 06:43 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod

That's good because I too does not have time to argue with "religious" peoples about theirs religion...



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 07:01 PM
link   
a reply to: PeterMcFly

Very well. Your '13 points' fit the criteria for common logic fallacies. Number 12 for example falls into the category of Appeal to Nature...

I could go on, but you will likely just dismiss it. After all you seem to think climate change and warming is a 'religion'.

Can you offer an explanation for the 40%+ increase of CO2 in the atmosphere over the past half century?
edit on 30-1-2015 by jrod because: ;(



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 07:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Entreri06

You couldn't get 97% of the worlds scientific community to lie..... It's a math issue really. Co2 holds more heat then O2 or nitrogen. So more CO2= more heat. Every year has gotten hotter then the last. It's insane to think adding elements to our planets "system" won't have an effect.

It's crazy to think all the worlds science communities are in a vast conspiracy to pass a carbon tax in America...

Now saying that a carbon tax won't help and will be squandered and stolen is 100% fair probubally 100% accurate!!!

But that doesn't change the math.... Nor does it change the massive conspiracy it would take to fool 97% of the worlds scientists.

We Americans always think we are so special. Aka all the worlds media outlets are in a massive conspiracy to discredit American conservatism and Fox News... It's laughable.


That's a completely fabricated percentage, you're not too well versed on this subject clearly so I won't be wasting my breath.



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 07:32 PM
link   
a reply to: grey580

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to take a look around you and see the extreme weather changes for yourself. Quit watching your local news and start watching WORLD headlines and you start to see a trend.



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 07:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Entreri06

Yeah, you can get scientists to lie, it certainly isn't hard;

You give them tenure, which you can take away
You give them "Chairs" in universities, which you can take away
You give them grants, which you can take away
You give them nice jobs, which you can take away
And don't forget about peer pressure ;-)

If they start telling the truth;

Again, don't forget about peer pressure ;-)
You destroy their credibility by turning bought and paid for peers against them
You destroy their lifestyle
You buy up their debts and call them
You set them up on trumped up charges, real or imagined, as long as it looks like there is evidence

Can you say Tesla, sure, knew ya could ;-)

As someone who has whistleblown on scientific and financial fraud in canadian universities, yes, you can buy scientists and professors. You know what else, you can buy their students too. One of my partners used to call the students "thinking meat."

Cheers - Dave
edit on 1/30.2015 by bobs_uruncle because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 07:49 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod



Your '13 points' fit the criteria for common logic fallacies. Number 12 for example falls into the category of Appeal to Nature




12- CO2 is plant food, with increasing CO2, biomass will increase.


CO2 being plant food is a fallacy!
LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

What they teach you at scool kid?

CO2 being plant food is a FACT!



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 07:50 PM
link   
a reply to: PeterMcFly

You completely missed the point. You claim that because CO2 is plant food and is found in nature, more CO2 is a good thing.

That is a logic fallacy.

yourlogicalfallacyis.com...

You also manipulated what I wrote to suit your argument. Essentially you pulled that I must be an idiot because CO2 is plant food and found in nature therefore good. See the above link to better understand your logic fallacy.

Also you failed to address the 40% rise in CO2 concentrations over the last half century.
edit on 30-1-2015 by jrod because: bad troll, no bridge



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 09:03 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod

Of cause warming WAS a reality, the only thing constant in climate is change, the issue is what caused it to warm and why did the warming cease before the years 1998-2002 even though CO2 has increased since then?

"Professor Judith Curry of, the chair, School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, on June 14, 2013: “Attention in the public debate seems to be moving away from the 15-17 year ‘pause’ to the cooling since 2002. This period since 2002 is scientifically interesting, since it coincides with the ‘climate shift’ circa 2001/2002 posited by Tsonis and others. This shift and the subsequent slight cooling trend provides a rationale for inferring a slight cooling trend over the next decade or so, rather than a flat trend from the 15 yr pause.”

Anastasios Tsonis is an American atmospheric scientist and distinguished professor at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, he argues that natural factors, especially ocean currents, may contribute more to climate change than human activity, and that the Earth is "now in a period of cooling that could last up to fifty years."



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 09:25 PM
link   
But I stand by the Original questions that I have a hard time getting past.

I should question science, and I do, but a majority of scientists and scientific organizations are telling me that global warming is real and that man is causing a great deal of it. Should I just ignore that?

We know from history, that those that ignore science, usually have problems.

Secondly, if all of these hundreds of thousands of scientists are in on some conspiracy...well it's too big of a conspiracy. That's not possible...is it? The largest conspiracy ever in the history of the earth.

Take the long view and see the larger picture. Yes? Don't get caught up in one graph, one email, one guy, one politician, one issue...take it all in together...that's what tells the real story....

You can't tell me to ignore science...that's the height of ignorance...and I'm here to deny ignorance.

Science...not big oil...

Yes?



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 09:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: PeterMcFly

I do not have time address all of your list of why you do not believe warming is a reality.

Number 4 sticks out. As a result of our burning of carbon based fuels, CO2 has increased significantly and continues to do so.

The increase of CO2 from 280ppm to 400+ppm is a significant one, and it has been shown that this increase is directly tied to man's habit of burning fuel.

We are changing the atmosphere of this planet!


The math fails.

All human activity accounts for 3% of all increases in global CO2 whereas the recorded increase is about 42%? Please publish the chain of custody documents of all readings from the sensors all the way through the databaser. No chain of custody of numbers? Just trust everyone no one would ever have an agenda other than the truth now would they?
t



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 09:57 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

If I actually thought like you I would have taken up smoking because the majority of scientists and scientific organizations once said smoking was safe and then died of cancer!

Even if CO2 global warming is true, a CO2 taxation does nothing but allow banks to trade trillions in future markets which is the only reason they pushing the CO2 crap down everyones throats. If they want to better the environment they can legislate change without taxation, thats what governments are empowered to do, not to ensure profits for the banking elite.



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 10:03 PM
link   
a reply to: tkwasny

No, your math and understanding of concepts like residence time has failed you and the carbon deniers.

The observed 40%+ of CO2 increasse is the past half century is a real one. The 3% number you pulled(out of air?) does not add up, nor does your claim that "All human activity accounts for 3% of all increases in global CO2".... It almost appears so you making up numbers to suit your argument.

You ask a loaded question there... chain of custody has nothing to do with atmosphere science and observations. Residence times do.

edit on 30-1-2015 by jrod because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Global warming schmarming,it`s all pure hoke.Reminds me of the boiler room tactics of Telemarketing.



posted on Jan, 31 2015 @ 02:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: dr1234

originally posted by: Entreri06

You couldn't get 97% of the worlds scientific community to lie..... It's a math issue really. Co2 holds more heat then O2 or nitrogen. So more CO2= more heat. Every year has gotten hotter then the last. It's insane to think adding elements to our planets "system" won't have an effect.

It's crazy to think all the worlds science communities are in a vast conspiracy to pass a carbon tax in America...

Now saying that a carbon tax won't help and will be squandered and stolen is 100% fair probubally 100% accurate!!!

But that doesn't change the math.... Nor does it change the massive conspiracy it would take to fool 97% of the worlds scientists.

We Americans always think we are so special. Aka all the worlds media outlets are in a massive conspiracy to discredit American conservatism and Fox News... It's laughable.


That's a completely fabricated percentage, you're not too well versed on this subject clearly so I won't be wasting my breath.


Kinda fabricated... 97% of all studies done assume climate change is man made... Tomato/ tamato.... Period there is a scientific consensus.

www.scientificamerican.com...





www.skepticalscience.com...



posted on Jan, 31 2015 @ 03:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sunwolf
Global warming schmarming,it`s all pure hoke.Reminds me of the boiler room tactics of Telemarketing.


Then please explain to us all why the reinsurance companies started to warn about it 20 years ago? And then panic?



posted on Jan, 31 2015 @ 04:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: Entreri06

You couldn't get 97% of the worlds scientific community to lie..... It's a math issue really. Co2 holds more heat then O2 or nitrogen. So more CO2= more heat. Every year has gotten hotter then the last. It's insane to think adding elements to our planets "system" won't have an effect.

It's crazy to think all the worlds science communities are in a vast conspiracy to pass a carbon tax in America...

Now saying that a carbon tax won't help and will be squandered and stolen is 100% fair probubally 100% accurate!!!

But that doesn't change the math.... Nor does it change the massive conspiracy it would take to fool 97% of the worlds scientists.

We Americans always think we are so special. Aka all the worlds media outlets are in a massive conspiracy to discredit American conservatism and Fox News... It's laughable.

You would also need to include a conspiracy amongst glaciers as well !!!!!! These pesky icy things would need to pretend to not be receding in order for the worlds temperature to not be increasing.......oh hang on they ARE receding. Not all of them but the majority.

DUH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



posted on Jan, 31 2015 @ 04:29 AM
link   
Let me just throw this in here for the heck of it:



God bless.



new topics

top topics



 
48
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join