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.

 

This Is What Happens When You Elect Climate Change Deniers

page: 5
38
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 7 2015 @ 04:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: amazing


But what about all the Scientists The "97%" ? of them? I'll admit the number probably isn't 97%, but it's a majority. And then you have good scientific organizations like NASA. If you don't believe them about climate change or man made warming, then why would you trust them on anything like aliens or the moon landings?


When science becomes politicised, then all data must be suspect.

Because you can't honestly sit there and state that it hasn't.


That's the thing Beez. It's NOT politicized outside the US. Outside of the US it's scientific fact. There reason for the politicization is because it doesn't feed American lobbies and would actually cost money to do anything about this.


I wanted to write several things, but basically, I don't believe you.


That doesn't surprise me. Many in the States are oblivious to what is happening outside of their country.




posted on May, 7 2015 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I am in the Justice Party.

Coal keeps the lights on. Thank the global, man made warmers for your electricity to keep your internet running.

No nuclear, how about that?

God forbid that Pittsburgh or Kanawah, West Virginia should be like Fukishima.

BTW, this past winter in Indiana, that we are just now coming out of...definitely the second worst since 1994.

I did a post the other day on remembering winters throughout my childhood. The Earth goes through phases and it did back then when we were told that the Earth goes through phases.

First it was El Nino, then it was La Nina, then it was styrofoam coffee cups causing it, then it was aerosol hair spray causing it, now it is Global Warming. Now the cows in Argentina are causing it. Now the people are causing it. Now the cars are causing it. Later it will be something else causing it.



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer



Either you are a heathen, denier who is a gross, uneducated ignorant fool or You are an enlightened progressive filled with all the knowledge and understanding of the universe.

Or they are like Cruz and the other regressive GOP'ers who thinks if you have a problem you should pray to some magical sky fairy to solve your problems for them.


Progressives won't allow you to just accept that homosexuality is a fact of life for a segment of the population, you have to like and embrace it to garner their approval.

The left just wants the rest of the public to accept that there are homosexuals just like throughout nature and to stop forcing their religious delusions on others.



I'm so glad, however, that we have people that know everything about anything about science and can sit comfortably upon their ivory tower and cast dispersions upon us, the unwashed masses.

It wouldn't be that way if the unwashed masses would just pull their heads out of their butts and actually research things instead of blindly believing someone just because they spout religious nonsense.



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 04:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: amazing


But what about all the Scientists The "97%" ? of them? I'll admit the number probably isn't 97%, but it's a majority. And then you have good scientific organizations like NASA. If you don't believe them about climate change or man made warming, then why would you trust them on anything like aliens or the moon landings?


When science becomes politicised, then all data must be suspect.

Because you can't honestly sit there and state that it hasn't.


That's the thing Beez. It's NOT politicized outside the US. Outside of the US it's scientific fact. There reason for the politicization is because it doesn't feed American lobbies and would actually cost money to do anything about this.


I wanted to write several things, but basically, I don't believe you.


That doesn't surprise me. Many in the States are oblivious to what is happening outside of their country.


Shakes head and rolls eyes.

As someone who has lived half his life outside of the "states" I'll let that remark slide.



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 04:36 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing




But if you step back, you have to agree that every one of the thousands of scientists and support staff and science majors and all the Universities...they can't all be in on a political conspiracy. That wouldn't make any sense. NASA Can't be lying to us..because that would be thousands of people in on a conspiracy. That doesn't make sense to me.
If you found a cure for cancer ,I would assume that there would be no more need for cancer research and you might find yourself out of a job ... If the grants are given to produce evidence that monkeys have walked on the moon you would have scientist lining up to produce scientific papers to show just that . You would also find a journal to publish the works . And you would find people to believe that .....Give the snake oil salesman a break eh .



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 04:38 PM
link   
Well it's official world world is gonna die now. I mean what's the point you throw every piece of evidence into the faces of the deniers and they don't listen. They insist that they're right based on nothing. Everyone who is a denier isn't a scientist, and that's a rule. People like politicians and average civilians think they can just come in and just override scientific opinion just because. It's not right it's not cool and it will be the end of us.
edit on 7-5-2015 by TsukiLunar because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-5-2015 by TsukiLunar because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 04:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: amazing




But if you step back, you have to agree that every one of the thousands of scientists and support staff and science majors and all the Universities...they can't all be in on a political conspiracy. That wouldn't make any sense. NASA Can't be lying to us..because that would be thousands of people in on a conspiracy. That doesn't make sense to me.
If you found a cure for cancer ,I would assume that there would be no more need for cancer research and you might find yourself out of a job ... If the grants are given to produce evidence that monkeys have walked on the moon you would have scientist lining up to produce scientific papers to show just that . You would also find a journal to publish the works . And you would find people to believe that .....Give the snake oil salesman a break eh .


I have to disagree with you. I don't think all grants are given only to research that advocates that man is causing global warming. I don't think there's any proof of that. Again, if you believe that, then you have to believe that there are hundreds of thousands of people in on this huge conspiracy and no one has spilled the beans yet. I wouldn't think that was possible?

arstechnica.com...

I realize this is just one source and not definitive for our discussion on this thread but I think it's a starting point. The article goes on to say...

The graph ostensibly shows how the US has gone from essentially funding nothing in the way of climate research to spending over $7 billion a year. But the vast majority of that money is in the form of "Climate Technology," and a careful reading of the report indicates that this goes to things like wind and solar power, biofuel production, and things of that nature. None of that money goes to the researchers who are actually generating the results that point to anthropogenic warming, so it can't possibly provide an incentive to them.

The money that is actually going to climate science is on the bottom of the graph, in purple. And, as that shows, funding has been essentially flat since the early 1990s. (Funding has gone up slightly in recent years, but is still in the neighborhood of $2 billion annually.) A lot of that money doesn't actually go to scientists, either, as it pays to support everything from some of NASA's Earth-monitoring satellites to land and ocean temperature monitoring.


edit on 7-5-2015 by amazing because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 04:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: amazing


But what about all the Scientists The "97%" ? of them? I'll admit the number probably isn't 97%, but it's a majority. And then you have good scientific organizations like NASA. If you don't believe them about climate change or man made warming, then why would you trust them on anything like aliens or the moon landings?


When science becomes politicised, then all data must be suspect.

Because you can't honestly sit there and state that it hasn't.


That's the thing Beez. It's NOT politicized outside the US. Outside of the US it's scientific fact. There reason for the politicization is because it doesn't feed American lobbies and would actually cost money to do anything about this.


I wanted to write several things, but basically, I don't believe you.


That doesn't surprise me. Many in the States are oblivious to what is happening outside of their country.


Shakes head and rolls eyes.

As someone who has lived half his life outside of the "states" I'll let that remark slide.


Is part of that "half" in the last 20 years when this has become a serious issue? Seriously man, the US is poopooing this issue. EVERYONE in the world sees it.



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 04:44 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

Course it's not possible! Of course it makes no sense! It's completely impossible to wrap my mind around the logic that some of these people employed in order to deny what every single climate scientist thinks is truth and what their data says. Global warming is literally one of the most well explain scientific theories we have. It's the same thing with evolution . It's madness complete and utter madness.



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 04:46 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

Well if you are only listening to the pro-agw side of the debate then I can understand how you could think that .Make no mistake that there are some that have suffered from not towing the agw meme . To know this you would have to look for the evidence because like science if you don't look and ask you will not find .



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 04:48 PM
link   
a reply to: intrepid

And it's all for a tax!? Ha ha ha ha this isn't even funny. This isn't right. This is Wrong this is objectively wrong. This is like if the universe could decide something was wrong it would be this. People even understand what a catastrophe we have ahead of us?


edit on 7-5-2015 by TsukiLunar because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-5-2015 by TsukiLunar because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 04:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: TsukiLunar
Well it's official world world is gonna die now. I mean what's the point you throw every piece of evidence into the faces of the deniers and they don't listen. They insist that they're right based on nothing. Everyone who is a denier isn't a scientist, and that's a rule. People like politicians and average civilians think they can just come in and just override scientific opinion just because. It's not right it's not cool and it will be the end of us.


And a million people screamed that nuclear was dangerous. Even now, no one accepts Chernobyl can happen in the US.

The problem is, you guys are trading off, you decry global warming and yet you benefit by the same thing that causes it, that you say causes it.

How about 3 billion people just stop breathing hot air at the same time. Perhaps that would solve the problem.

BTW, if you respond to my post then you are benefitting by the pollution of coal to power the electricity to get you onto the internet, by a device that was made in a polluting factory by workers driving polluting cars.

Coal=steel=factories=roads=buildings=electricity=jobs=consumer goods=transportation of said consumer goods=stores=you buying computer=you on the internet.

The deniers are the ones who benefit the most but scream the loudest. Either get off the internet, turn your lights off, turn off your air conditioner, don't drive to the store to buy your food, or accept the fact that until a solution is brought forward to handle the problem, you are a denier of the reality of your own consumerism that caused the problem.



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 04:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: the2ofusr1
a reply to: amazing

Well if you are only listening to the pro-agw side of the debate then I can understand how you could think that .Make no mistake that there are some that have suffered from not towing the agw meme . To know this you would have to look for the evidence because like science if you don't look and ask you will not find .


I try to read both sides and I do read stuff posted on this thread. I really get both sides on ATS. One of the benefits of being here and I'm constantly forced to defend my position and take a good hard look.

But I think as some other's have stated here, if AGW is a scam and hundreds of thousands ..well actually hundreds of millions of scientists and support staff and university professors and everything are in on it. What's the end game? A Carbon Tax. How much is this carbon tax and how will it adversely effect me, my business and my family? Will it be so high as to cause me to close my business, lose my house and go bankrupt? That could be bad. Will it sink the entire world economy into a great depression/recession? We just had one of those.



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 04:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing
FACT as Elon Musk has shown, if we build electric cars people will buy them.

FACT Solar gets cheaper and more reliable and more efficient every year.

FACT the NASA budget is a really, really, really small drop in the bucket. I'd much rather fund money then have it go to military and alphabet agencies and congressional paychecks and all of that crap.

FACT the money that gets cut from NASA just gets blown on something stupid without any scientific value.


1. I live in Alaska. A rig that loses about 10 miles range for every 10 degree temperature drop would be a suicidal error in judgement up here. Also, how's that electricity generated to fill those batteries? I realize the average American can't fathom the fact that it really doesn't matter if their rig runs on gasoline or recharged electricity... that power has to be generated through some manner of combustion in 90% of the country.

2. Solar? grist.org...

California’s proposed Blythe plant will require a whopping 7,000 acres of Mohave Desert in order to deliver 2,100 GWh per year. The area of a coal plant producing the same output will typically be one square mile (640 acres) or less.


3. Little expenditures matter. We tax payers get sick and tired of being nickel and dimed to death. a couple of extra tax dollars tied to this, a couple tied to that, soon we're seeing hundreds or thousands of additional annual dollars in OUR wealth stolen from us by the jackasses in DC. IT STOPS NOW.

4. Absolutely true! A wise politician would package that money towards debt paydown or a tax rebate.



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 04:54 PM
link   
a reply to: WarminIndy

Then let us work towards a solution so that me and you don't have to give up the modern necessities that we live with every day. Denying the problem isn't gonna stop it and we at some point we may be forced to stop living this modern lifestyle? Do you like your air conditioner? Great! Let's make one that doesn't choke the very life out of the planet. What is so wrong with that?



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: TsukiLunar

What is killing the "global warming" agenda is not, the issue been truth or no, is all the interest money, profiteers and corrupted entities that are investing in it.

They are not behind the wellbeing of humanity, but rather their dirty pockets, we will still be burning in earth, (if clima change is about us cooking) while they find a way to preserve their corrupted progeny wealth.




posted on May, 7 2015 @ 04:56 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing

If you go to the IPCC and look at what they were looking for from scientist you will see that it is to show agw . Now think about that . If you dont show the human component to global warming then your paper does not qualify to be received by them and therefor not eligible for the moneys associated with it .

Do a search and the IPCC's own statement tells you what the criteria was for excepted papers . They wanted to create a consensus . I could get a consensus that monkeys have walked on the moon with enough funding . Heck the tobacco industry had scientific papers showing that smoking was not harmful . There is lots of evidence to show the lack of integrity in science .



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 04:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

But, but, but deniers are soooo persecuted!



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
It is insulting to call science a religion... If you are going to debate the topic then prove it wrong. Calling it a religion is just a science denialism buzzphrase, probably cooked up straight in an Oil company's board room.


Even the oil companies get it right sometimes...


LOL! You can't be serious? ALL of science is wrong, EXCEPT the oil companies who conveniently profit off of the populace not believing that Climate Change is real. That has to be the funniest thing I've read all day!


How did you get that out of "oil companies get it right sometimes?"


All science isn't wrong, but all science should be both testable AND encouraged by the theorists to be tested. The AGW "science," as we have clearly seen time and again, is loudly discouraged from being tested. Asinine little barbs like "deniers" are thrown at those who dare suggest the "science" be tested before we sell the farm over it. Carefully constructed and regulated "consensus" is often thrown about, a "consensus" in which any disagreers are actively removed from the tally to ensure the numbers appear much greater than they realistically are and anyone who claims otherwise is shunned and/or shouted down. That isn't science, it's mob rule... a purely emotional response by people who see their dollar signs slipping away from them.



posted on May, 7 2015 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Well, seeing as that budget was used to make false unproven statements they don't really deserve it do they?

Anyone putting politics above the scientific process and scientific integrity should be cut from the payroll



new topics

top topics



 
38
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join