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.

 

Obama's bid to save the world

page: 1
26
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+17 more 
posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 02:47 PM
link   
To me, Climate Change fanatics are more dangerous than terrorist. The damage and control you can have over people's lives in the name of saving the planet is just scary.

All it takes is a few sociopaths with huge ego's to literally enslave humanity not because they want to but because they have to in order to save the planet. I've been saying for years, if there's such a thing as an antichrist he/she will be a climate change fanatic. The Bible says in the name of peace, he will destroy many.

I can't think of anything that would seem to be more peaceful yet utterly destructive than what you can do in the name of saving the planet.

You can tell people how to live, what to eat, what to drive, how many children they can have and you can even kill people to control the population in the name of saving the planet.

One of the reasons Obama rejected the Keystone pipeline was because he's headed to the HUGE global warming conference in Paris where climate change fanatics will meet up and try to figure out the ways they can control people's lives in the name of saving the planet.


Fire up Air Force One. President Barack Obama’s headed to Paris to try to save the world.

After a year of quiet diplomacy ahead of next month’s 190-country climate change conference, Obama took the most public, contested step yet in his second-term transformation into the greenest of U.S. presidents: rejecting the Keystone XL pipeline.

But by the time he was wrapping up his remarks Friday morning in the Roosevelt Room, Obama pivoted away from chiding environmentalists and Republicans to argue that Keystone XL was important in a different way: "Approving this project would have undercut our global leadership on climate.”

The president and his aides repeatedly talked about the decision Friday in terms of global leadership. That global leadership, Obama confirmed after months of speculation, is going to take him to France right after Thanksgiving for the Paris climate talks, where he will try to seal what would be the biggest, most significant international agreement on combating carbon emissions and climate change — arguably bigger and longer lasting than anything else he or anyone else has ever done in office.


www.politico.com...

DANGER! DANGER! DANGER!

What this tells you, is Obama could care less about America. It doesn't matter if this was good for America and American workers, it's about GLOBAL LEADERSHIP ON CLIMATE CHANGE.

So the EGO is headed to Paris to save the world and American interest be damned because he has to save the planet.

The problem I have with these egotistical corrupt climate change fanatics is they have the audacity to think they can reverse climate change. Their e ego's are so big, they think they will overturn nature by making everyone's lives miserable except their's.

If you listen to the "experts" there's nothing that can be done to reverse climate change. We will have to basically live like the Flinstones to stop these apocalyptic scenario's.

So these fanatics should just allow science and technology to fix these things. There's no behavior modification that can reverse climate change. This will not be the rationale in Paris. Obama and other climate change warriors will say the world has to change the way it lives whether we like it or not in order to save the planet.
edit on 7-11-2015 by neoholographic because: (no reason given)



+4 more 
posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 02:51 PM
link   
If Obama found the cure for cancer, R.Paul would start a filibuster; Ted Cruz would file an appeal, and they'd take it to the Supreme Court to have the cure ousted. People on ATS would make multiple threads accusing him of ruining our lives.

Welcome to the 21st century.
edit on 11/7/2015 by angeldoll because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 02:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: angeldoll
If Obama found the cure for cancer, R.Paul would start a filibuster; Ted Cruz would file an appeal, and they'd take it to the Supreme Court to have the cure ousted. People on ATS would make multiple threads accusing him of ruining our lives.

Welcome to the 21st century.

They are all playing for the same team.... even Ron and Rand.
The common man has no friends in Washington DC.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 03:05 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

The World dosen't Need to be Saved , just Cleansed of the People who Allegedly want to Save it according to their Own Personal Agendas .



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 03:06 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

Transcanada's Keystone XL pipeline withdrew its application after a seven year "review".

www.zerohedge.com...
edit on 7-11-2015 by infolurker because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 03:18 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic

It's a no-win for Obama. If he does nothing then he's "helping to destroy the environment." If he does something then he's "taking away our rights to save the environment." His Presidential code name should be dammed if you do-dammed if you don't.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 03:24 PM
link   
a reply to: angeldoll

I believe they've had the cure for cancer long before Obama. It just isn't in the best interest of big Pharma, who contribute to campaigns such as Obama's run for President, to allow the cures to get to humanity. Certainly not while there is more money to be extorted out of those in medical need.

We can have climate change any time TPTB so decide. They have had the ability to manipulate climate for decades.

It's time people change. Take back our power and stop supporting those who are working for the special interests. They aren't so "special" at all.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 03:27 PM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy




The common man has no friends in Washington DC.


No truer words were ever written.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 03:32 PM
link   
Yeah,...gee..without the Keystone Pipeline all that oil and gas will have to be transported by train.
Wait a minute!...Who owns Berkshire-Hathaway and Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad Rail systems?...Why isn't that huge Obama Donor Warren Buffett????

Gosh. I wonder if there's cronyism afoot in Obama's decision.
edit on 7-11-2015 by IAMTAT because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 03:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
Yeah,...gee..without the Keystone Pipeline all that oil and gas will have to be transported by train.
Wait a minute!...Who owns Berkshire-Hathaway Rail system?...Why isn't that huge Obama Donor Warren Buffett????

Gosh. I wonder if there's cronyism afoot in Obama's decision.


LOL.... now you see the reasons behind it all.

Not that we won't use the product but "who" gets paid to deliver it.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 03:42 PM
link   
Well, I'm glad he did it, even though I don't like most of his policies. Screw NAFTA. Hopefully it will keep the Canadian fingers out of our cookie jar for a bit.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 03:50 PM
link   
For someone who cares about climate change so much, you would think in 7 years time we would all be driving hydrogen fuel cell cars and using almost all renewable energies. Actions speak louder than words, and Obama just hasn't delivered any real change. That's why I don't trust his climate change agenda!



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 03:59 PM
link   
The TRUE reason Obama turned down Keystone XL PIPELINE:


President Barack Obama’s decision to withhold approval of the Keystone XL pipeline will hugely benefit one of his largest supporters – Warren Buffett. Buffett made a $34 billion dollar investment in the Burlington Northern Santa Fe railroad (BNSF) one year after Obama was elected.

BNSF essentially invented the business of carrying crude oil by rail when it launched its first long oil train in 2009. Rail shipments from North Dakota have surged from fewer than 100,000 barrels a day in 2010 to 800,000 barrels a day last October.

No wonder Buffet has such a good friend in the White House.

Mr. Obama sites environmental issues as the key reason to hold up the Keystone XL Pipeline. But his rhetoric is more fiction than fact. Three years of State Department environmental impact studies have found “no significant impacts”. The truth is that the pipeline poses a far smaller environmental risk than moving oil by train.

www.mybrokerfraud.com...

FOLKS, the oil is still going to come into the country...it will now just be transported by trains owned by major Obama donor Warren Buffett. Studies show transport by train has a greater risk and potential for negative impact on the environment, than by pipeline.

It's all payola via political cronyism.
edit on 7-11-2015 by IAMTAT because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 04:01 PM
link   
a reply to: jaws1975



Actions speak louder than words, and Obama just hasn't delivered any real change.

Are you sure? I'm not that big a fan of the current administration but there does seem to have been a decrease in CO2 emissions.
instituteforenergyresearch.org...
edit on 11/7/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

I'm talking change that is equivalent to the rhetoric.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 04:26 PM
link   
a reply to: jaws1975

Well, that's pretty vague. Or do you expect CO2 production to just suddenly be reduced because it would be a good thing to happen?

You know, the administration doesn't create laws right? But EPA regulation does seem to have had some effect.

edit on 11/7/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 04:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: jaws1975



Actions speak louder than words, and Obama just hasn't delivered any real change.

Are you sure? I'm not that big a fan of the current administration but there does seem to have been a decrease in CO2 emissions.
instituteforenergyresearch.org...


The decrease in emissions started before Obama got into office. Carbon emissions also rose in 2013.

According to liberals, there's nothing that can be done to reverse climate change.


The CMO (Chief Misinformation Officer) of the climate ignorati, Joe Nocera, has a new piece, “A Real Carbon Solution.” The biggest of its many errors comes in this line:

A reduction of carbon emissions from Chinese power plants would do far more to help reverse climate change than — dare I say it? — blocking the Keystone XL oil pipeline.

Memo to Nocera: As a NOAA-led paper explained 4 years ago, climate change is “largely irreversible for 1000 years.”
This notion that we can reverse climate change by cutting emissions is one of the most commonly held myths — and one of the most dangerous, as explained in this 2007 MIT study, “Understanding Public Complacency About Climate Change: Adults’ mental models of climate change violate conservation of matter.”

The fact is that, as RealClimate has explained, we would need “an immediate cut of around 60 to 70% globally and continued further cuts over time” merely to stabilize atmospheric concentrations of CO2 — and that would still leave us with a radiative imbalance that would lead to “an additional 0.3 to 0.8ºC warming over the 21st Century.” And that assumes no major carbon cycle feedbacks kick in, which seems highly unlikely.

We’d have to drop total global emissions to zero now and for the rest of the century just to lower concentrations enough to stop temperatures from rising. Again, even in this implausible scenario, we still aren’t talking about reversing climate change, just stopping it — or, more technically, stopping the temperature rise. The great ice sheets might well continue to disintegrate, albeit slowly.


thinkprogress.org...

So now Obama gets credit for lowering carbon emissions before he got into office??? Give me a break!



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 04:39 PM
link   
a reply to: neoholographic




So now Obama gets credit for lowering carbon emissions before he got into office??? Give me a break!

Please show where I made such a claim.
Or was that just a strawman?



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 04:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Sure you did:

Actions speak louder than words, and Obama just hasn't delivered any real change.

You then said:

Are you sure? I'm not that big a fan of the current administration but there does seem to have been a decrease in CO2 emissions.

So Obama has delivered real change by lowering carbon emissions but if you would have looked at the chart you posted you would have seen carbon emissions started to drop before Obama took office.

Your post makes no sense unless you were trying to make the claim that "real change" has happened under Obama because CO2 emissions were decreased.



posted on Nov, 7 2015 @ 04:48 PM
link   
a reply to: angeldoll

But this isn't the cure for cancer... it's the cure for Western prosperity and it is based on politically manipulated "science."




top topics



 
26
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join