It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: mc_squared
a reply to: jrod
The irony is that the real reason the public terminology was rebranded is so people like that would go around saying stuff like "climate change? climate changes all the time - it's obviously just a natural cycle!!"
Frank Luntz himself explains the exact reasoning right here at the 2:47 mark:
I don't think even Luntz realized just how well this strategy would ultimately work though. Especially when you factor in the added bonus that it also caused these very same oblivious parrots to turn right around and then exclaim "remember how they used to call it global warming lolol"
It's why we have leaked memorandum showing this has been their target audience since the very beginning:
What is important to them is what people believe and what they can make people believe.
It's been going through climate changes over 6 billion years.
Cow farts and hairspray aren't the problem. The combustion of millions (not billions) of year old carbon compounds is.
Cutting back on hairspray and cow farts won't halt the cycle.
All that matters is the almighty dollar.
originally posted by: Kromlech
OF COURSE the climate on planet earth changes, and CONSTANTLY changes...
originally posted by: angrypsycho1977
We are entering a new Dark Age. Science will be feared, religion revered.
I live in an area where I have seen first hand how conservation efforts have improved my immediate environment over the past 25 years. I have seen my skyline turn from a dull brown to a brilliant blue, and all thanks to environmental regulations. But that doesn't matter. All that matters is the almighty dollar.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: SuperFrog
doesn't this make you to wonder will we survive?
No. I don't think this particular problem will eradicate humans.
I do think that it will make life less pleasant (understatement) for our children and theirs.
a reply to: elfrog
Research scientists need jobs... so if I were a research scientist, I would gladly decry 'global warming' if it meant the difference between a paycheck or not