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.

 

Global Warming Theory cannot be considered to be a science any longer

page: 4
30
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 09:47 PM
link   
a reply to: miniatus

Is it a fact ? No. Not yet. The jury is still out. And 97% of which scientists ? You have to watch very vague statements like that.

"Wizard's First Rule" in effect.







posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 09:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

Obviously you have done nothing to back your claims and prefer your wubby blanket of denial, confirmation bias and echo chambers.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 10:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: NewzNose
a reply to: jrod

They say human activity on Earth has caused global warming on Mars.


Source



“Why are the Martian polar ice caps suddenly melting so fast?” asks astrophysician Dan Cuttingham, from University of Oxford. “If this cannot be entirely explained by the sun, then this phenomenon must be the direct result of human caused Global Warming” he concedes.


"MUST BE result of human caused Global Warming".

Because they say so?


Sigh, does anybody check their sources anymore?

worldnewsdailyreport.com...


Information contained in this World News Daily Report website is for information and entertainment purposes only. The website and the information (including changes to the terms herein) may be changed or updated from time to time without notice. In consideration for using this website, the visitor agrees to hold WNDR and its directors, officers, members, employees and agents harmless against any claims for damages or costs or any loss of any kind arising out of the access to or use of this website or any information contained in or obtained through this website.



The nature of Internet communications means that your communications may be susceptible to data corruption, unauthorized access, interception and delays. This website may include incomplete information, inaccuracies or typographical errors. World News Daily Report, and any other persons involved in the management of this website, may make changes in the information and content included in this website at any time without notice.


Yes, doing an amazing service in promoting the truth, this website.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 10:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Raggedyman

Obviously you have done nothing to back your claims and prefer your wubby blanket of denial, confirmation bias and echo chambers.


Yeah I do like my blanky

Go away Kali, you are just annoying now

We disagree, we can do that



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 10:14 PM
link   
Its such a trip to watch the progressives totally ignore the most informed person in this thread and go after the low hanging fruit instead.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 10:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greven

I suggest looking in the mirror.

You have no argument. You have no science. You have no evidence.

You have merely words, worthless bits residing on a server somewhere in the world; a server that you connect to by technology.

Technology developed by research similar to that which warned us of the troubles facing us - before the internet even existed. Your opinion is shaped not by reason, but by emotion and marketing. Ah, the power of consumerism.


No I wont argue with a fool
Greven, you havnt a clue my position.

Let me reiterate it again just so you dont look the fool over and over again

Irrespective if climate change is real or not
Scientists should not be ridiculed or pressured by the public to accept the political party line

Do you understand that.
Its not about climate change, nothing I am saying is about my view on climate change. Your argument is invalid and irrelevant to this thread

The argument is about political agenda pressuring people to follow a party line

Capich, understando
edit on 3-12-2015 by Raggedyman because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 10:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
No I wont argue with a fool
Greven, you havnt a clue my position.

Let me reiterate it again just so you dont look the fool over and over again

Irrespective if climate change is real or not
Scientists should not be ridiculed or pressured by the public to accept the political party line

Do you understand that.
Its not about climate change, nothing I am saying is about my view on climate change. Your argument is stupid and irrelevant to this thread

The argument is about political agenda pressuring people to follow a party line

Capich, understando

Again, seek the mirror.

First, ignore what the OP says, and click the link cited.

Second, ignore the text of that article, and click its source.

Third, ignore the text of THAT article, and click its source.

That has been listed before. Read the origin page. Notice that all of those people being called out are politicians, not scientists.

Reflect on that in your position. Then reflect on this:

US scientists were pressured to tailor their reports on global warming to fit the Bush administration’s climate change scepticism, a congressional committee heard on Tuesday 30 January. In some cases, this occurred at the request of a former oil-industry lobbyist.

“High-quality science [is] struggling to get out,” Francesca Grifo, of the watchdog group Union of Concerned Scientists, told members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. A UCS survey found that 150 climate scientists personally experienced political interference in the past five years in a total of at least 435 incidents.

“Nearly half of all respondents perceived or personally experienced pressure to eliminate the words ‘climate change’, ‘global warming’ or other similar terms from a variety of communications,” Grifo said.

edit on 22Thu, 03 Dec 2015 22:55:54 -0600America/ChicagovAmerica/Chicago12 by Greven because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 11:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: Metallicus

What data is problematic?


Did you miss Schuyler's post?



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 11:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: AndyMayhew

originally posted by: TiredofControlFreaks

Can there now be any doubt that global warming is a religion with adherents using psycological force to convert the non-believers.


Aye

The same "religiion" that says the world is not 6,000 years old, orbits the Sun and that your god didnt create all the animals in one day.

The same "religion" that gave you penicillin, beer, trains and the ability to communicate over the internet. And provides you with clean water and light and food.


That was one of the weirdest logical fallacies I've read in a while.

He was clearly referencing "Climate Change".

Clean Water? Beer? Food?
edit on 3-12-2015 by BatheInTheFountain because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 11:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: Raggedyman
No I wont argue with a fool
Greven, you havnt a clue my position.

Let me reiterate it again just so you dont look the fool over and over again

Irrespective if climate change is real or not
Scientists should not be ridiculed or pressured by the public to accept the political party line

Do you understand that.
Its not about climate change, nothing I am saying is about my view on climate change. Your argument is stupid and irrelevant to this thread

The argument is about political agenda pressuring people to follow a party line

Capich, understando

Again, seek the mirror.

First, ignore what the OP says, and click the link cited.

Second, ignore the text of that article, and click its source.

Third, ignore the text of THAT article, and click its source.

That has been listed before. Read the origin page. Notice that all of those people being called out are politicians, not scientists.

Reflect on that in your position. Then reflect on this:

US scientists were pressured to tailor their reports on global warming to fit the Bush administration’s climate change scepticism, a congressional committee heard on Tuesday 30 January. In some cases, this occurred at the request of a former oil-industry lobbyist.

“High-quality science [is] struggling to get out,” Francesca Grifo, of the watchdog group Union of Concerned Scientists, told members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. A UCS survey found that 150 climate scientists personally experienced political interference in the past five years in a total of at least 435 incidents.

“Nearly half of all respondents perceived or personally experienced pressure to eliminate the words ‘climate change’, ‘global warming’ or other similar terms from a variety of communications,” Grifo said.


I really dont care about your agenda,
I really dont care about what you want to fight for or against.

Internet warriors like yourself concern me.
You have an agenda and nothing will get in your way

Again, you dont know my position on climate change so how can you make stupid baseless assumptions

and for every link you place up I could link an opposite view, I dont care to because you are welcome to your opinion, right or wrong

Tell me Grev, if the government are going after other politicians, then OBVIOUSLY, they would be pressuring other people who disagree with then, NO?

We disagree, now let it go



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 11:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: miniatus


It's rather insignificant to rally for the 3% who, most likely, are the religious scientists.. and yes that's a thing ..



Explain to me why "religious" scientists would be anti AGW? Why did you even classify that 3% as religious? I'm just not following this train of thought. Please enlighten me.



posted on Dec, 3 2015 @ 11:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Raggedyman
I really dont care about your agenda,
I really dont care about what you want to fight for or against.

Internet warriors like yourself concern me.
You have an agenda and nothing will get in your way

Again, you dont know my position on climate change so how can you make stupid baseless assumptions

and for every link you place up I could link an opposite view, I dont care to because you are welcome to your opinion, right or wrong

Tell me Grev, if the government are going after other politicians, then OBVIOUSLY, they would be pressuring other people who disagree with then, NO?

We disagree, now let it go

Hmm.

An interesting reaction to being shown how flawed the OP of this thread is.

I prescribe reading up on the related effects of confirmation bias.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 12:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Greven

originally posted by: Raggedyman
I really dont care about your agenda,
I really dont care about what you want to fight for or against.

Internet warriors like yourself concern me.
You have an agenda and nothing will get in your way

Again, you dont know my position on climate change so how can you make stupid baseless assumptions

and for every link you place up I could link an opposite view, I dont care to because you are welcome to your opinion, right or wrong

Tell me Grev, if the government are going after other politicians, then OBVIOUSLY, they would be pressuring other people who disagree with then, NO?

We disagree, now let it go

Hmm.

An interesting reaction to being shown how flawed the OP of this thread is.

I prescribe reading up on the related effects of confirmation bias.


You are accusing me of confirmation bias, How?
You dont know my position in relation to climate change, I dont know the OPs either

You are the one who has made a decision and wont consider any other option.

As I have said, I can find replys to the links you posted, you wouldnt.

I prescribe reading up on the related effects of confirmation bias.

Do you know what a pan test is?



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 04:21 AM
link   
a reply to: cuckooold

* sigh *

Why don't people read the posts of others before berating a post and its source? Someone else beat you to it!



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 05:02 AM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

That we kill nature, is true, but there‘s a little disagreement if human caused carbon dioxide can disrupt global climate. (And that those scientists who contradict the authorities will be proven right after some time would not be a surprise to us .)
Some scientists say –where are they getting the guts?- that modern men are slowing down greenhouse gases: ‘Historical deforestation and extinguishing forest fires keep greenhouse gases low. Uncontrolled forest fires would spark greenhouse gasses, and if the world would be full of trees, what would happen than?’
So far the anarchists which just like anyone else (except the real rulers) don’t know for sure where global warming is coming from.
Certain is that only a fraction of carbon dioxide contributes to greenhouse gases. Atmosphere exists about some 0.037 percent of carbon dioxide, a record over the last millions of years, a depth record. Read www.evawaseerst.be...



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 06:13 AM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

It doesnt get any better than this! Thought crime will now get you 5 years in gaol!

Trust Emperor Merkel to come up with this Dystopian Orwellian Edict
www.abovetopsecret.com...




The new addition to the German criminal law could make offenders face up to five years in jail if convicted. “As the COP 21 illuminates, it is a necessity in these times of global climate change to cut the debate short and take action for the future” Holocaust deniers and climate change deniers are the same as they are guilty of disturbing the public peace, an offense punishable by law,”



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 09:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Bone75

No but I had already addressed Climategate which you, unsurprisingly, don't seem to realize also addresses Schuyler's post.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 09:10 AM
link   
a reply to: BatheInTheFountain

Science...

I guess it went over your head.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 09:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

You don't seem to understand how discussion boards work.



posted on Dec, 4 2015 @ 11:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Greven

Florida's Governor has issued a gag order in any talk of climate change/ global warming:
In Florida, Officials ban term 'Climate Change'

Also banned is global warming and sustainable.

The denier crowd cries global agenda when world leaders discuss controlling CO2 emissions, but I think nothing spells out agenda like what Florida's GOP 'leaders' are doing to ignore the AGW problem.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join