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.

 

Climate Change Denial: Why?

page: 12
20
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 08:13 AM
link   
a reply to: pthena

Bush, Bush, Bush.

For a total retard he sure was effective in manipulating the world wide data.

Is it that tough for you to admit that people lied about/manipulated the data without blaming it on the boogeyman George W. Bush?




posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 08:13 AM
link   
a reply to: MayanBoricua


There is also evidence that planets are heating up all across the solar system, not just the Earth. Conflicts with the above, i know. Anyways, who pollutes the air more? Our cars, or Al Gore's private jet zooming around the world every day? Why the hell should I give him my money? The govt already takes too much. That is the real reason they cry about the environment so much. They want more of our money. Greedy bastards would probably embezzle it anyways. But here's the cherry on top:

Fossil Fuels are not the biggest cause of global warming. Raising animals is a million times as bad as all our cars and jets. Do you have any idea how much methane cows release? THEY OVERSHADOW EVERYTHING LIKE A MONOLITH. FOSSIL FUELS DON'T COMPARE. If anybody really cares about the environment, they would become vegetarian. So unless you're going to give up meat, I don't want to hear a damn thing about the environment. That's like telling people not to drink soda cause it's unhealthy while chain-smoking cigarettes.

Interesting lecture. Thanks. You're right, it was a condescending opening. I've tried talking to ATS as though everyone was equally prepared for the debates - that doesn't work either....

plus - yes, the meat industry is a filthy, disgusting, disaster. The way food is raised is appalling. How do you know I don't already buy locally grown stuff, including grass-fed cattle and natural farm eggs? You don't. You just assumed it, I guess. Because my husband's family are deer-hunters and fishermen. My yard is managed without excessive use of water, or fossil fueled trimming, or chemicals of any kind. We use natural cleaners like vinegar and lemon and baking soda (and the new line of clorox products called "Green Works").

We recycle, reuse, repurpose, reclaim, reserve, and pay attention to the health of our home and property.

I don't like being a dick - I also don't like being accused of not listening to conspiracy theories - because I do. I just don't buy into all of them - and I want to know WHY some people do. Is that a crime?

The OP asked "why" - it didn't ask "why don't you like this style of asking why?"

And given the nastiness of some of the respondents, and their assumptions that I A) don't know anything about anything and 2) am just a liar and 3) just bitch and talk and don't do my part and 4) think I know everything about everything...

is just projection. There's no reason to be so nasty. I have stated clearly that I believe climates change over the course of mellennia. I understand that. I also understand that we aren't helping. The images that member "desert" posted - of people wearing masks while bicycling - or the grand canyon under a haze of smog - are relevant.

She's right, too - if we could talk about it without calling "climate change mitigation" - and just do something about it, like not pollute, that would make me feel better. Too many industrialists don't give a toss about spewing their effluvia into the oceans, the air, or the Earth.

We have one planet. We need to take care of it. Just like home maintenance and farm management.
I was in on the last cycle of "environmentalism" - tree huggers, and Greenpeace, and solar energy (my brother is in the solar energy industry as a R&D guy - has been since about 1980).

We care. We were raised to care.
Oh well - so hate me for caring, and for being pissy about people who don't care. I don't care.
And I'm exhausted of trying to bring anything positive or informational to this site and getting attacked by people.

At least the educated millennials are now handed the torch and provided the education to do something about it.


Thanks for your feedback.

edit on 8/9/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 08:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: network dude



I don't know exactly what percentage. Didn't claim to. I do know that we are POLLUTING THE AIR, EARTH AND WATER. Those are facts.



I agree. But if "the science is settled" and you are an idiot if you don't believe in Man made warming, how is it possible that we just don't know that number? Could it be that the factors involved are many and our understanding is very small at this point?

I really hate the way arrogant assholes treat people with regards to this topic. We have no idea if two years from now, a complete shift in temperatures will happen and start to go back down. We don't know much about how many things factor into this current warming. All we have is history and some very recent data, and history shows that all this has happened before quite a few times.



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Which data exactly? What kind of issues?

What are you even trying to say, worldwide conspiracy to keep some official carbon dioxide story intact? We're not talking about 9/11, are we?



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 08:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
What are you even trying to say...


It was really quite simple. I understand you like to be hyperbolic and obtuse but I will ask again.

Has there been any issues with inaccurate or manipulated data being used to further an AGW viewpoint?



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 08:24 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus



Is it that tough for you to admit that people lied about/manipulated the data without blaming it on the boogeyman George W. Bush?


They didn't. They spin-doctored a topic, which was a rather predictable move from big oil. It's cheesy and devious as buck, but heck... did it help to understand which side suppresses scienctific evidence and how they usually operate? Obviously it didn't help at all.

Anyway. You've mentioned issues with data, are we supposed to guess what excatly you're talking about?



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 08:25 AM
link   
a reply to: MayanBoricua

That will indeed be new to many. It isn't new to me. My uncle is a farm manager.
For God's sake - I have relatives in Nebraska, and Iowa, and Texas, and Illinois - we are ALL AWARE by the very nature of our upbringing of what goes on in the agriculture and meat industries.


JESUS....do you people just refuse to believe that some people are knowledgeable about this stuff?!!!

You know what I'm NOT knowledgeable about? Physics. Calculus. So I don't come on here and say "Calculus is BULLSNIP", or "PHYSICS is retarded! It's a lie!"

Give me a freaking break. My whole family are midwesterners. We know some shizzle about how food is grown, how oil is pumped, how animals are raised. We are not ignorant of the issues, or the science, or the technology.

Thanks for providing info for THOSE WHO DO NEED TO KNOW IT.
I'd extend my hand but you'd no doubt slap it away.
Whatever.

edit on 8/9/2016 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 08:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
Anyway. You've mentioned issues with data, are we supposed to guess what excatly you're talking about?


Start with Al Gore's hockey stick.



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 08:30 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Okay, I'll say this again.

sigh

The Climate is Changing. Derp. We all see that and know that if we are remotely literate and educated.

Man is also polluting the earth. Is there a connection? It seems very probable that there is a connection. And even if there ISN'T, why should we not stop the polluting and reckless rape of this planet anyway? Does there have to be a certain "percentage" for it to matter?



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 08:31 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus


Is it that tough for you to admit that people lied about/manipulated the data without blaming it on the boogeyman George W. Bush?

Actually this thread is about why people flat-out deny human caused climate change.

So yes, it is quite tough to explain the flat-out denial without bringing in the massive Bush era propaganda.



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 08:34 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

My .02... because too many people are too unwilling to acknowledge that humans have been crapping in our own den since the agricultural revolution. We as humans do not seem to care that we are breeding entirely too much, with all of the negative consequences that result from just plain too damn many people existing.

I don't recall the name of it, but I read a book in the 1960s that estimated that even if we stopped over-populating and over-polluting THEN it was too late to avoid major problems, of which climate was only one.

And we clearly did not stop. And those major problems are beginning to manifest to a degree even the most close-minded find it hard to ignore. But not deny, interestingly.

Whether humans are 100% responsible for what is happening or not is I believe arguable. But it is NOT arguable that we are major contributors. All one has to do is go sit and watch a coal-fired power plant for a while. Huge, massive clouds of all the fun stuff produced by burning coal, belching out of multiple stacks. 24 hours a day, 7 days a week for 30, 40, 50 years and more. And that is just one of many such plants. And only one example.

To pretend that humans are completely innocent (or not responsible if you prefer) of contributing to what is going on is the height of absurdity.



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 08:46 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus



Start with Al Gore's hockey stick


The issue is part of the global warming controversy and has been one focus of political responses to reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Arguments over the reconstructions have been taken up by fossil fuel industry funded lobbying groups attempting to cast doubt on climate science.
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 08:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: network dude

Okay, I'll say this again.

sigh

The Climate is Changing. Derp. We all see that and know that if we are remotely literate and educated.

Man is also polluting the earth. Is there a connection? It seems very probable that there is a connection. And even if there ISN'T, why should we not stop the polluting and reckless rape of this planet anyway? Does there have to be a certain "percentage" for it to matter?


what a sad response. It seems you weren't capable of comprehending the words I wrote.
derp indeed.



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 08:54 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

So Al Gore managed to mess with all the data imaginable, from now on to eternity? How did he manage to pull that off?

You're being quite defensive and vague about it, hence I'd guess you couldn't even point your finger on the data which was allegedly tampered with. Honestly, I didn't expect anything else from a mason. Green as it is, eh?




posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 08:56 AM
link   
a reply to: network dude

a "sad" response?

What did you want me to say? Just make your point. I'm feeling a little defensive right now, for some inexplicable reason!!! Just like most others on here!





posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 08:58 AM
link   
Most of the climate deniers I have had run ins fall within these categories
1) Ignorant of science.
2) Believe the right wing denial propaganda
3) Can't relate their own actions with larger consequences
4) Their career/occupation is in conflict with the changes we need to make
5) Haven't experienced the changes personally so are therefore sceptical
6) Are scared of the prospect of extinction so are in denial



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 09:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: pthena
Actually this thread is about why people flat-out deny human caused climate change.


Well, considering I am not one of those people you should be relieved. I question the overall contribution and the hysterics surrounding it coupled with the outright fearmongering.


So yes, it is quite tough to explain the flat-out denial without bringing in the massive Bush era propaganda.


I have not cited that cretin in any of my posts.



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 09:02 AM
link   
a reply to: pthena

Is Al's stick correct in all its distended glory? How long will people help him carry it around?






edit on 9-8-2016 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 09:05 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

I have not yet read the thread, only then OP. It appears to me to be unconfrontational, a rare thing in this debate, so I am going to answer it specifically before I dig deeper.

Firstly, I do not oppose Climate Change. No one can really oppose a theory; a theory either is true, or is not. I disagree with some of the methods used, many of the predictions, and the effectiveness of almost all of the solutions.

I grew up in a little hollow nestled in the mountains of Northeast Alabama. My father built our home, and later our mini-farm, with his own hands. When he bought the land from his father, it was scrub land... just a relatively flat section of forest dotted with chunks of limestone/granite bedrock. He cleared it, laid down a driveway, dug a well, built a garage to hold his lumber, then tore down an old business nearby for the lumber he needed.

He cleared only what he needed, preferring to leave the rest. So we had a brand new house, built 90% from reused wood, sitting under trees easily over 100 years in age. When I was growing up, those woods were my playground. I learned that mountain well, and how to move around without scaring the animals. I learned where the berries grew, and which ones I could eat. I learned to live with nature, not in spite of it.

Then I went to school, and I learned about other people. I learned I talked funny. I learned I wasn't 'sophisticated.' I learned I was a 'square' and a 'hick' and a 'clodhopper.' I also learned that of all the wild animals I had come into contact with, humans were the most vicious, unpredictable, and dangerous animals I had ever met.

The advantage of that lesson was that I became tough. If you hit someone often enough, for long enough, hard enough, it becomes useless to hit them again... they become immune to the pain.

My sanctuary was my mountain. The trees meant me no harm. The foxes, possums, coons, even the snakes, had no ill will toward me. When the day was done, I could walk 100 yards and be in my sanctuary, safe and secure from the hazards that had spent the day pursuing me. I could be home.

Eventually, I also learned science. I had a talent for it. I learned how the trees grew, how the animals lived when I wasn't watching, and how machines worked. In high school I started learning electronics, because I could make things that would respond to me with very cheap parts.

I still live in that mountain. My father, the first and best 'enviromentalist' I ever knew, passed away, but my mother still lives. I care for her, as she once cared for me. My children are grown and have left the nest; I already see the stirrings in themselves of a desire to come home to thistle mountain sanctuary. That makes me proud; they love nature too.

When I first heard of Global Warming, it was a TV promo that spanned maybe a couple of months. They would show quick commercials that hinted at some great revelation coming soon, and that footprint was always there. Then the concept of 'carbon footprints' was introduced. Like everyone else, I wanted to know more about this. But the more I read, the less sense it made. Carbon dioxide was heating the earth? But that's what the plants use to make the oxygen we breathe. The seas are going to rise? Crops are going to wither and die?

The more I studied, the less sense it made. I started to no longer believe the theory, for a multitude of scientific reasons. Then came the suggestions to fix the problem. None, not one, suggested cleaning the air. All suggested limiting the amount of energy by making it too expensive... essentially saying people who grew up like me shouldn't have access to something as common and beneficial as electricity. Those dangerous humans were at it again, scheming, plotting, looking for a way to get more of that green paper they seem to value more than life itself, and as always, they cared nothing about who or what they hurt.

You mention the early enviromentalist movements. I remember them. I grew up in the 70s. I remember the flower children, the hippies, the free love movements. I remember watching theirs antics on TV, trying to understand them. I never could. They were showing off, making waves, putting on airs, despite not understanding the nature they claimed to love so much. I remember their back-to-nature commutes, always a failure because farming was too hard, and sometimes because they would eat their seed and have nothing to plant for the next year.

Maybe their intentions were good, but their results were disastrous. The commutes melted away into obscurity, while our garden produced year after year with no end in sight. And we didn't need to walk around dressed funny or protest.

I am a true environmentalist. I always have been. I now either own or control 90 acres of virgin forest that stands just as proud today as it did when I was born, as it did when my father first saw it, as it did before memory. It has provided for me and mine for generations, because we understand it and know it and respect it. Across the globe I see humans destroy, abuse, and disrespect similar places in wholesale fashion. Now those same humans want to tell me how to fix their pollution woes, and all it's going to take is for some of them to get more green paper.

Right. Give me a break.

I do not oppose Global Warming. I state that it is what it is: more confusion and greed from a species that has taken both to the level of an art form. And I oppose any attempt to make me a part of it.

TheRedneck



posted on Aug, 9 2016 @ 09:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
So Al Gore managed to mess with all the data imaginable, from now on to eternity? How did he manage to pull that off?


Did I say that Captain Hyperbole?

He certainly did enough to cause people to question his data and methodology. Would you not say?


You're being quite defensive and vague about it...


Mentioning Al Gore is 'vague'? Interesting.


Honestly, I didn't expect anything else from a mason. Green as it is, eh?


Was that supposed to upset me? You really need to try harder.




edit on 9-8-2016 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join