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.

 

Top scientist resigns from post - admits Global Warming is a scam

page: 7
71
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 12:44 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

Source: NOAA


According to a new NOAA-sponsored study, natural oceanic and atmospheric patterns are the primary drivers behind California's ongoing drought.


Source: WRCC

Driest Year: 1924

Worst Drought: 1910-1940

Edit: You aren't very good at this. Baiting for racism in another thread and then laziness in this thread. Good work.

edit on 25-9-2015 by raymundoko because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 12:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: grandmakdw

(NASA scientist): The climate does change, get warmer and cooler,
but that mankind has absolutely nothing to do with it.

He said it is a function of natural cycles that happen regularly on the earth.
.




This. This is the truth.

"Global Warming", is a farce created to lure society into a false sense of security, leading them to believe they are responsible for what is happening. Which also has the profitable side effect of making them believe they have the power to do something about it...

We don't.

What is happening has happened many times. It will happen many more, regardless if we're here to witness.

It cannot be stopped. It cannot be reversed.

The best we can do is learn to adapt.
edit on 1212018305pmFridaykAmerica/Chicago by Gh0stwalker because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 12:50 PM
link   
a reply to: raymundoko

And is this drought not on par with the 1910 one?

And yes, your source says it is more then JUST mismanagement. They should have predicted it, but doesn't mean the mismanagement caused it.

Second source is just the weather the past 30 days.

Didn't bait for jack there pal, lets keep it civil here and stay on topic.

wattsupwiththat.com...
Oh this is where you are getting your info from? Makes sense.
Very peer reviewed.

edit on thFri, 25 Sep 2015 12:50:57 -0500America/Chicago920155780 by Sremmos80 because: (no reason given)

edit on thFri, 25 Sep 2015 12:53:04 -0500America/Chicago920150480 by Sremmos80 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Gh0stwalker




It cannot be stopped. It cannot be reversed.


And it CAN be helped along.

Don't think anyone is saying it is not natural for the earth to warm up, people are saying we may be helping it along faster then the natural cycles.



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 12:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

I had the second source set to the right dates for you, but I guess you have to edit it yourself. Sorry for that.

And no, this Drought is not comparable to the 30 year drought because it hasn't been a drought for 30 years...It's been 4 I think.

I selected the 30 year drought as it was recent and while data was being recorded. There was a drought that lasted from 850AD to 1000AD.

The main point is Cali has droughts. It is a desert. It's part of the weather there. The reason for the water shortage is mostly due to water management.



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 12:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gh0stwalker

originally posted by: grandmakdw

(NASA scientist): The climate does change, get warmer and cooler,
but that mankind has absolutely nothing to do with it.

He said it is a function of natural cycles that happen regularly on the earth.
.




This. This is the truth.

"Global Warming", is a farce created to lure society into a false sense of security, leading them to believe they are responsible for what is happening. Which also has the profitable side effect of making them believe they have the power to do something about it...


Actually the opposite is true. Global Warming denial is a farce created to lure society into a false sense of security by leading them to believe that there isn't anything to worry about when we dump tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. And believe me when I said that this position was created. It's true. The entire position is funded and argued from by Big Oil.

YOUR account of things doesn't make any sense. How is telling humans that they are contributing to screwing up nature on the planet supposed to lead someone to a false sense of security?
edit on 25-9-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 12:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

Wait what? You ARE bad at this.

You asked:


What peer reviewed paper is saying that it is not and has zero to do with climate change?


I linked you the NOAA paper. Is NOAA not a good source for you?

Then you said


peer reviewed indeed
on something you never even asked for. Lazy. So Lazy.



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: raymundoko

Obviously it hasn't been going for 30 years, talking about dry years. Like from your own source 2013 was one of the driest years on record.

I never doubted that we get droughts, I am arguing this stance that water mismanagement is the direct cause of it.



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: raymundoko

I said that about the whatsupwiththat that has an article arguing from the same standpoint you are.

It's right there in my post, linked it then said what I said.

Are you able to not go after me and avoid the ad homs?

edit on thFri, 25 Sep 2015 13:08:19 -0500America/Chicago920151980 by Sremmos80 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 01:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80

There are two arguments though. One that the drought is natural. You asked for a peer reviewed article on that. I provided it.

WUWT arguing from my same point is purely coincidence. I am sure I am not the only one who shares my views. I never claimed that was peer reviewed. If you don't understand how you attempted to engage in misdirection with your comment then perhaps you have been blindly defending your stance for too long.



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 01:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: flice
I still don't understand why there is still debate wether its warming or not........



Part of my issue with deniers is that they started by denying that any change was happening..

They screamed, lied and argued with science until it was too obvious to deny and the melting glaciers were just too real and visual to continue to lie about.

THEN and only THEN did they change to...Ummm..OK...Climate change IS happening BUT it's not manmade!

Credibility is shot to hell with those folks.




Sure thing it is, but come on, it's like everyone on Earth believe that we are living a on stable system that doesn't undergo change?!?! The only scientific data I firmly believe are those that show the immense changes that have been going on for 100.000 years if not millions. Changes that will keep on going on wether we are here or not.



What deniers never mention is the time scale...Yes the earth has an evolving, changing, climate...

The rapid pace of change right now is akin to the temperature rising from -8 to 80 degrees in an hour in the middle of winter...and then deniers saying...well..there is winter and summer and the weather changes! Nothing to see here!!


edit on 25-9-2015 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-9-2015 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 01:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Indigo5

Inaccurate. Most scientists who are skeptical of AGW typically agree the earth is warming as we are still exiting the last ice age. Full blow deniers are usually not scientists but media types. They did as much damage to the skeptic side as Al Gore did to the AGW side.



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 01:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
The planets governments and corporate oligarchies control and develop and decide all industry associated with that which could potentially lead to effecting the planets cyclic climate and sustainable environment.

If it be a scam, the Governments and corporate oligarchies are to blame.
If it be a fact, the Governments and corporate oligarchies are to blame.





The climate industrial complex. The most concentrated power, and wealth scheme ever created in the minds of man.

The entire world is their playground, and in just the hands of a few.



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 01:51 PM
link   
a reply to: raymundoko
You claim to be a skeptic, but I have yet to see you actually bring any evidence that contradicts what the overwhelming consensus of the scientist are telling us. Invoking authority and claiming that you know better because you hold an advanced degree won't cut it.

Show us some evidence and maybe myself and other members of the 'AGW' cult may actually believe you. By evidence, I am talking about stuff that is not a WUWT talking point that has been debunked.


edit on 25-9-2015 by jrod because: space



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 02:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: raymundoko
a reply to: Indigo5

Inaccurate. Most scientists who are skeptical of AGW typically agree the earth is warming as we are still exiting the last ice age. Full blow deniers are usually not scientists but media types. They did as much damage to the skeptic side as Al Gore did to the AGW side.


No...the same scientists ...it is a strategic ladder of denial.



1.CO2 is not actually increasing.
2.Even if it is, the increase has no impact on the climate since there is no convincing evidence of warming.
3.Even if there is warming, it is due to natural causes.
4.Even if the warming cannot be explained by natural causes, the human impact is small, and the impact of continued greenhouse gas emissions will be minor.
5.Even if the current and future projected human effects on Earth's climate are not negligible, the changes are generally going to be good for us.
6.Whether or not the changes are going to be good for us, humans are very adept at adapting to changes; besides, it’s too late to do anything about it , and/or a technological fix is bound to come along when we really need it.

en.wikipedia.org...

Want me to show you where you pretend scientists and orgs were claiming nothing was happening???



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 02:04 PM
link   
a reply to: jrod

Out of curiosity ever seen and 'overwhelming consensus' here on ATS ?

I haven't.

Because in 'enlightened' societies there are ALWAYS people that disagree.

They don't accept universal 'truths'.

And sciences entire reason for being is to separate from what is from what isn't with the eternal possibility of change.

A more apropos term for 'climate change' is religion. Because everyone knows Religion isn't open to change or discussion.



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 02:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: jrod

Out of curiosity ever seen and 'overwhelming consensus' here on ATS ?


Yes.


I haven't.


Because you aren't thinking hard enough. It's currently next to impossible to find someone that disagrees with marijuana legalization on these boards. Almost every member either doesn't participate in the threads, agrees with the thread and posts in it, or just S&F's them then moves on because they already agree.


Because in 'enlightened' societies there are ALWAYS people that disagree.

They don't accept universal 'truths'.


Overwhelming consensus doesn't mean 100% of the people agree. It means that SOOO many agree that they drown out the naysayers.


And sciences entire reason for being is to separate from what is from what isn't with the eternal possibility of change.


Science's reason for existing is to help better understand the universe around us by testing hypotheses and discarding the ones that are found to be wanting and leaving the ones that hold up to testing.


A more apropos term for 'climate change' is religion. Because everyone knows Religion isn't open to change or discussion.


Climate Science changes all the time. Hell, part of one of the reasons that you denialists don't believe in Climate Change is the computer models which is usually claimed are faulty because they change all the time. Well THAT means the theory isn't constant like religion or like you are implying. You can't have both arguments be true. Though you CAN say both of them, but then you are hypocrite.



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Nice to see a climate industrial complex supporter in action.

Defending the indefensible.



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 02:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Nice to see a climate industrial complex supporter in action.

Defending the indefensible.


Whatever this is supposed to mean. Care to say anything besides ad hominems?



posted on Sep, 25 2015 @ 02:28 PM
link   
How did this get 60 flags?

5 year old story and an OP that refused to answer the questions on why it needed to be rehashed.

Funny that people are willing to take one mans word when it benefits them but when the majority of scientist say something its all bs and money fueled.



new topics

top topics



 
71
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join