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 opposition is ideological in nature.

page: 2
13
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 01:48 AM
link   
a reply to: jobless1
Yes, it is the CO2.
I'm not sure which particular nuke you're talking about but ozone in the upper atmosphere doesn't have much to do with global warming. Though a lack of it can be problematic for other reasons and too much in the lower atmosphere is not good for other reasons as well.



edit on 1/21/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 01:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

You're right, of course.

If I was to approach that with a conservative mindset, I would argue that the problem as to why someone might continue contributing to "the rate at which CO2 is being produced" is a moral one, as opposed to a bureaucratic one.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 01:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
Dude, green energy type technology is going to eventually be the future. Maybe not in 5, 10, or 20 years -- but BP and the other big fossil fuel companies are HEAVILY invested in them. Why? Because these behemoth companies plan far, far into the future. These companies know the direction things will eventually go. BP and Exxon plan 50+ years out into the future. Contrary to conspiracy theorists, it's not because they want to "squash" green energy -- they just want to be the people to profit from it when it becomes something people want/demand down the road.


Great point. Best I think the current anti global warming calculation is more base - They need to dump the fossil fuels while they ares still worth a premium, and certainly while the current investors are alive.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 01:51 AM
link   
a reply to: TheTory

Now you're sounding like the Pope. I guess that's conservative?
www.theatlantic.com...



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 01:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: jobless1

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: TheTory
The primary "solution" now is to reduce the rate at which CO2 is being produced. It's not feasible to do more than that.

While this will not actually solve the problem it will slow the rate of change, allowing more time for actual solutions and means to adapt to be found while mitigating the impact.


sure its the CO2 and not the nuke they ignited in the upper atmosphere that killed the ozone lol. The government has a lot of reason to blame the population and not themselves.


When you say GOVERNMENT it really glosses over the fact that the government and the politicians who comprise the government literally give those companies BILLIONS of dollars every year.

The government is not a single entity with a brain which seems to explain your POV

There is much more money in OIL than there is in free energy dude, use your noodle.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 01:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

I hope that's a compliment, though I doubt it. Yes I think that without any ethics, one would be less likely to care about the world around him. At least a small amount of sacrifice of base comforts might be required.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 01:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: jobless1




You should question any science finding especially environmental sciences when the subject of their research keeps them in a job.

Ok. Good idea. Questioning is good. Disregarding is not so good.

Do you think it's a good idea to buy a house? After all, the only reason people build them is that it keeps them in a job.


no people actually build them to live in unless your a contractor then its a job. If a contractor was telling the government all housing was incorrectly built and only his company needs funding and research to correct the issue while other contractor claimed the houses are built to code I might call BS. That's the real issue! Nasa confirms it then says there are also large iceberg forming at the same time so which is it? Global warming or not?



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 02:00 AM
link   
a reply to: jobless1




Nasa confirms it then says there are also large iceberg forming at the same time so which is it? Global warming or not?

Oh my. Do you know where icebergs come from? They come from glaciers. When glaciers slide into the ocean they form icebergs.

Yes. Global warming would tend to increase the rate at which glaciers slide into the ocean.

This seems to be a case of what I was talking about. Disregarding the science, without actually knowing even a little bit about it.




edit on 1/21/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 02:01 AM
link   
a reply to: jobless1

What does NASA and the scientific community get out of perpetrating a huge hoax on humanity?

Lay it down for me



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 02:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: jobless1




Nasa confirms it then says there are also large iceberg forming at the same time so which is it? Global warming or not?

Oh my. Do you know where icebergs come from? They come from glaciers. When glaciers slide into the ocean they form icebergs.

Yes. Global warming would tend to increase the rate at which glaciers slide into the ocean.

This seems to be a case of what I was talking about. Disregarding the science, without actually knowing even a little bit about it.






Somehow this proves the point that the opposition is not scientific in basis, rather, ideological cloaked in a thin vail of
bully-bull.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 02:09 AM
link   
a reply to: yesyesyes



In this case, I believe American conservatives are not honest about the basis of their opposition to global warming. Outwardly they express the idea that global warming is a liberal conspiracy used to advance the NWO, destroy freedom and make AL Gore rich, but I think that is a real load of malarky through and through. 


It doesn't matter to me if global warming is real or not because it advances the NWO and destroys freedom which is a much more dangerous and a bigger and more imminent threat to me than global warming.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 02:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: yesyesyes



In this case, I believe American conservatives are not honest about the basis of their opposition to global warming. Outwardly they express the idea that global warming is a liberal conspiracy used to advance the NWO, destroy freedom and make AL Gore rich, but I think that is a real load of malarky through and through. 


It doesn't matter to me if global warming is real or not because it advances the NWO and destroys freedom which is a much more dangerous and a bigger and more imminent threat to me than global warming.


What makes you think that the oil industry, the one that is the basis of the US dollar and Federal reserve is not actually the NWO?

You do understand that America's monetary system is based upon petroleum don't you?

Who do you think is more rich and powerful than the fossil fuel industry, the banks, and the FED?



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 02:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Addendum:

Co2 caused ocean acidification. Ph imbalances as a result. Volcanic activity which is mostly Co2 and CO has been measured to have certain effects on temp. And general climate. Take a look at Venus and its atmospheric composition.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 02:17 AM
link   
Yes, the big scary NWO. *yawn*

We're eventually going to become a global civilization. Hell, if aliens exist they're not going to see us as British, American, Indian, French, Chinese...we're going to just be "human" to them.

We don't call the "dog park" by every kind of dog that's there. It's just a "dog park" and Earth is just a huge park for humans.


edit on 21-1-2016 by MystikMushroom because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 02:22 AM
link   
a reply to: yesyesyes
I think part of the problem is the way the issue was presented to the general public initially. The public was told that global warming was happening without going into the science of it to begin with. The public was told that they had to believe in it or else terrible things will happen (they probably will one day). The public were treated like idiots and bullied by the warmists and called "deniers" and rednecks and so forth. This quickly got a lot of people offside. The people at the top were arrogant and basically were saying "believe us because we tell you to and we are smart and you are dumb". A lot of wild claims were made, especially here in Australia, when we were told sea levels would rise about a meter by 2000 and 10 meters by 2010. No one believed that and they can see that it has not happened. The typical bullying, name calling and arrogance of the left side of politics has let the global warming side down. No one listens to a bully.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 02:29 AM
link   
Oh...another Warming thread......charming.

Nice Opening post, opening poster.

The only problem is "Global Warming" has'nt existed for a few years now, Its called "Climate Change" these days.

When it is too hot....it is Climate Change.

When there are record cold winters, Like in the USA, Australia and Europe, it is Climate Change.

The World is an amazing place.

Humans.....well???



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 02:49 AM
link   
a reply to: gort51

Here's an example of Co2 and CO based immediate climate change:


en.m.wikipedia.org...


Global climate Edit
In the year following the eruption, average Northern Hemisphere summer temperatures fell by as much as 1.2 °C (2.2 °F).[10] Weather patterns continued to be chaotic for years, and temperatures did not return to normal until 1888.[10] The record rainfall that hit Southern California during the “water year” from July 1883 to June 1884 – Los Angeles received 38.18 inches (969.8 mm) and San Diego 25.97 inches (659.6 mm)[11] – has been attributed to the Krakatoa eruption.[



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 02:49 AM
link   
Double post, thanks.
edit on 21-1-2016 by OneGoal because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 02:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: gort51
Oh...another Warming thread......charming.

Nice Opening post, opening poster.

The only problem is "Global Warming" has'nt existed for a few years now, Its called "Climate Change" these days.

When it is too hot....it is Climate Change.

When there are record cold winters, Like in the USA, Australia and Europe, it is Climate Change.

The World is an amazing place.

Humans.....well???




yep funny how the author should have known this right seeing as how highly educated they are on the subject



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 03:48 AM
link   
a reply to: yesyesyes
Scientic is a bought and paid for industry now. There is no pure science anymore...it is all linked to $$. Do you think that a scientist would get a grant to study the falsehood of global warming? ....um....lol...No



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join