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 A Hoax? No, Stupid! IT'S PSYCHOLOGY ...

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 08:58 PM
link   


Before I get into my main point, let me start by telling you my beliefs on the hot-button issue of "Man-made climate change". I'm starting to think the "Man-made" part is mostly if not completely false. The "climate change" part, however, is entirely true. Yet, the world isn't getting warmer as quickly as scientists would have you believe. In fact, the current level of warming is completely within the bounds of nature and has occurred countless times before in Earth's history.

But I didn't start this thread today to argue why man-made climate change is false. There are PLENTY of threads on ATS already that can help convince you of this likely reality, so I'd just be beating a dead horse. No, for today, I'll be arguing the reasons why man-made climate change has nothing to do with global conspiracies and everything to do with the reason people tend to believe in man-made climate change in the first place.

Let's continue ...



First, I'll tell you why the global warming phenomenon isn't being propagated by a secret super-massive cabal to serve their agendas, and it's certainly the easiest point to argue of the two I mentioned in the previous paragraph.

If you DON'T believe in a NWO, or at least aren't sure if one exists, go ahead and skip to the beginning of my next point immediately beneath the picture of Obama speaking in Paris this year. If you DO believe and are unshakable in this inherent belief of yours, read on ...

Let me just ask this one question to those who believe global-warming or man-made global warming to be a conspiracy: Do you have any concrete evidence whatsoever? Note how I didn't ask for proof. I only want real and convincing evidence.

"Well, because the elites/bankers/Illuminati wish to create a global message to unite the peoples of the world into a New World Order and eventually cull the masses to better control the ..."

Let me stop you right there. Please provide evidence for that point, because that by itself won't convince anyone no matter how silver-tongued you are.

"Well ... the U.N. ... Blah blah blah ... and are owned by a small group of elites ... blah blah blah ... called the Illuminati ... blah blah blah ... funded by Rockefeller and Rothschild ... blah blah blah ... and ..."

Woah! Easy there buddy. Let me just dispel every single point you just brought up in that one incoherent statement so you can take a breather or two, alright?

Don't you think that if this Illuminati or New World Order could be so easily uncovered by a random skeptical (or, rather,paranoid) citizen that they would have existed for this long? Don't you think all the complaints from your fellow believers of this theory would've raised complaints against their respective governments and a formal investigation would be underway? If the facts are so plain to see, wouldn't said investigation find incredible amounts of even more damning activities within the government? How can such an immense organization be kept so secret from the masses for so long?

My answer is: It can't. There is no such thing as a NWO. The "connections" you're seeing are the exact same thing as when people see strange faces or patterns in smoke or paintings. They only exist in your head.

Now I'm not saying a global cabal couldn't exist, but I have no doubt if there is one existing today that it's not nearly as powerful or widespread as many paranoid-types would have you believe.

I doubt I convinced you today that the Illuminati or NWO doesn't exist. What I was trying to do is get you ready to pretend a secret organization like this doesn't exist. To pretend a global organization isn't responsible for every major event in world history.

Are you pretending yet? Good. Now we can get back to the main point of my thread.



I'll make a bold-statement and say that the concern from the global community concerning climate change is 15% based on actual evidence and 85% based on psychological fallacies in our human logic. These falsehoods contribute to exaggerations by even renowned researchers. These exaggerations include the "fact" that global warming is occurring at levels much faster than can be produced by nature alone.

Look at the following timeline-graph of warming over the past fifteen-hundred years:



Pretty damning evidence of unnaturally high levels of warming within our century, right?

Wrong. The vague possibility of direct manipulation to the graphs aside, the years before we had accurate records of changes to the entire Earth's climate are still uncertain. How can we rely on information that's only around 75 years old when that's only a mere point on a point on a speck in all of Earth's historical climatic changes? Even IF the climate is warming unusually fast, do you think we could trust such scant evidence as supposed "proof"?

If you're wondering how anyone could believe something like this, I'll tell you right now there's no evil world organizations involved. The only "evil" is the one within all of us, and that is basic human ignorance and delusion.

When I see this graph, I see many flaws. But when most people see this graph, they see solid scientific evidence. This is because humans tend to follow figures of authority, whether that authority is based in power, knowledge, or both. In this case the "authority" consists of the various scientific organizations promoting the global warming theory.

So, what convinced the scientists behind global warming theory to believe in it in the first place? Skewed logic. Even the most intelligent among us aren't invulnerable to making grave errors, especially in the case of scientific researchers. In the case of man-made climate change, some scientists looked at the correlation between greenhouse gas emissions and the rise in temperatures around the world. They concluded that there had to be a connection where there really was none. They forgot an important logical rule: Correlation does not necessarily mean causation.

Yet, due to the fact that fears within governments at the time climate change started to gain traction revolved around the over-reliance on non-renewable resources, politicians gobbled up the idea willingly. Soon, during the 70's and 80's, the U.N. became interested in the topic and began funding campaigns to spread awareness about the issue. It caught on, and the rest of the story is polar bears and ice caps ...

Now you see a much more logical reason to why people tend to believe in artificial climate change than a grand "hoax" being perpetuated forcefully on the people.

This isn't to say we shouldn't limit our usage of fossil fuels. Eventually, we're going to run out of these nonrenewable resources and we'll need to find alternatives to this system in the coming decades. But the supposed 'immediate life-or-death threat' from mm-climate change is complete mass-hysteria.

Finally, whether you agree this is due to human psychology or some evil global conspiracy to control the masses is up to you. I just hope that you at least pretended to accept my beliefs as a possibility, rather than quickly moving on to a thread which already supports yours.


edit on 6-12-2015 by Passerby1996 because: no reason given




posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 09:05 PM
link   
The Big Lie accredited to Joseph Goebbels

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

Substitute UN for "State"

edit on 6-12-2015 by Gothmog because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 09:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

The problem with that is the "State" isn't really lying. Lieing implies they already know the truth yet are telling you something else to manipulate you. In reality, the most powerful person in the State is just a fooled as your neighbor across the street. It's not a lie being perpetuated from a small group upon the rest of humanity. It's all of humanity lying to the rest of humanity. It's basic psychology.


edit on 6-12-2015 by Passerby1996 because: no reason given



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 09:09 PM
link   
Nicely laid out!

Tell you what, I've also noticed a recent trend on the BBC, linking pollution in Chinese cities with global warming, despite the fact that the two are distinct phenomena (Even if you believe in man made warming).

Seems as though no one gives a damn about truth anymore, just about moulding public opinion.



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 09:12 PM
link   
a reply to: SprocketUK

Exactly. I also should've mentioned the fact that humanity likes to play the hero. They always want to save something that doesn't need saving, which in thid case is humanity and the Earth. Really, at least for this particular issue of global warming, all that needs saving is humanity's sense of the difference between truth and bull***t.



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 09:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Passerby1996
a reply to: Gothmog

The problem with that is the "State" isn't really lying. Lieing implies they already know the truth yet are telling you something else to manipulate you. In reality, the most powerful person in the State is just a fooled as your neighbor across the street. It's not a lie being perpetuated from a small group upon the rest of humanity. It's all of humanity lying to the rest of humanity. It's basic psychology.


No , I stand ferociously by exactly my words....You did see the part about substituting UN for state , yes ?
You do know the IPCC and Al Gore started all this , yes ? Know who controls the IPCC. Bet most people dont.And , possibly , do not know what the IPCC is anyway.


edit on 6-12-2015 by Gothmog because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 09:27 PM
link   
a reply to: Passerby1996
I'm with you on this one, my cycle studies doesn't see anything new.



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 09:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Passerby1996

Its good to question things but just because you think it's not true does not make it "not true"

See man made climate deniers are like Christians, you can show them all the science/proof of evolution and it goes thru one ear and out the other. Don't get me wrong I believe in other factors that cause climate change but we are also on that list.

The PROOF that man-made CO2 is causing global warming is like the chain of evidence in a court case. CO2 keeps the Earth warmer than it would be without it. Humans are adding CO2 to the atmosphere, mainly by burning fossil fuels. And there is empirical evidence that the rising temperatures are being caused by the increased CO2.

That being said cap and trade won't work, because it's all passed down to the consumer, the middle class.



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 09:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Gothmog

Actually, Al Gore and the IPCC didn't start the fears over climate change: They brought it to mainstream attention.

The IPCC and Al Gore based their findings on decades worth of scientific reports based on anthropogenic climate change. Whatever you want to believe, they didn't just make this stuff up.



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 09:33 PM
link   


Let me just ask this one question to those who believe global-warming or man-made global warming to be a conspiracy: Do you have any concrete evidence whatsoever?

Agenda 21.
Go check it out!



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 09:36 PM
link   
a reply to: muSSang

I never had any delusions that I would convince those who held opposite beliefs from mine just from one article. I just hope to contribute to the general wave of criticism going against anthropogenic climate change.

Indeed, there is empirical evidence that Co2 is causing rising temperatures worldwide. However, there's also empirical evidence for the contrary belief to that notion, however ignored that evidence may be.

Saying all this: I respect your position, and I don't blame or demean you for believing whaf you do.



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 09:38 PM
link   
a reply to: VoidHawk

Never heard of it. I hope it's not like Zeitgeist. Although that series was well produced, the facts behind it are quite skewed once you dig beneath the apparent "facts". Neverless, I'm open to new perspectives.

EDIT: Just realized Agenda 21 is nothing like Zeitgeist. Oops.


edit on 6-12-2015 by Passerby1996 because: mistakes



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 09:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Passerby1996
a reply to: VoidHawk

Never heard of it. I hope it's not like Zeitgeist. Although that series was well produced, the facts behind it are quite skewed once you dig beneath the apparent "facts". Neverless, I'm open to new perspectives.


LOL How can you make a post such as the op and then claim to have never heard of agenda 21.
And no its not like zeitgeist, to check it out go to the UN.



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 09:50 PM
link   
a reply to: muSSang

I think there is just enough truth to the climate change agenda to be able to manipulate the populace for the benefit of the powers that be. I question the official narrative, but I won't pretend I know the truth one way or the other.

The key to me is to follow the money and those that control the narrative. Based upon those things I know something isn't right with the official story.



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 09:52 PM
link   
a reply to: VoidHawk

Oh ... whoops! It sounded like the name of a conspiritorial documentary. Actually, I think I may have heard of it before yet I never looked into it. I'll do that now.



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 10:08 PM
link   
Wondering why the mods decided to move this thread to the "Rant" section. Perhaps it's due to the lack of sources?

So be it ... though I thought this would be considered less an angry opinion piece and more a look at what could be influencing the climate-change debate behind the scenes.



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 10:14 PM
link   
This planet used to be a ball of molten magma. Life will go on. I prefer warm to being under mile thick glaciers.



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 10:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Passerby1996

I view it like this if there once was an Ice Age there must be a Heat Age/Oven Age,Sun Age,ect(if it hasn't already passed)....,I believe the planets temperatures change often and if we were able to travel back in time we might see that it is perfectly normal,its only a few centuries of information we are going by when the earth has been said to be around for Millions and Billions of years,throughout thoses Millions and Billions of years I would expect all sorts of temperature variations.
edit on 6-12-2015 by VashTheStampede because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 10:19 PM
link   
I've posted this before but you may not have seen it.Worth the laugh.

And I agree, there is definitely climate change,but it has nothing to do with us.



posted on Dec, 6 2015 @ 10:25 PM
link   
www.greenmedinfo.com...

After the grounding of every plane post 9/11 there was noted a spike in temperatures, the lack of contrails caused it.

One way or another human activity is definitely effecting the weather, to what degree is anyone's guess.

Pollution and greenhouse gasses, there is no doubt in my mind.

Can we stop it, do we need to?

The evidence is there, is there a natural factor as well, thats the question.




top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join