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: 26
20
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 14 2016 @ 02:31 PM
link   
Take a step back for one second climate change deniers. There is no time IN THE HISTORY OF THIS PLANET that our glaciers and ice caps have melted the way they have in the last 100 years. If the earth is just experiencing a heating cycle, it happens over a duration of 1000's of years....not within 100 years.

This is the ultimate conspiracy (note that I left off "theory") that will ultimately kill off millions of people on this planet and send many countries to war against each other for resources (and it won't be just for oil).

We've been very fortunate where we have not lived in a time of global war, but that time is coming and it is again caused by rampant ignorance and greed. Climate change will be the biggest powder keg that this world has ever seen. If you have kids that are 10 or less years old, there's a high likelihood that they will fight in a war in their lifetime.

For those that get it, we see climate change has something that we need to tackle immediately. For those that continue to deny, the blood of millions of people/animals will be on your hands. All for what.....so that you can live a stubborn life. Better wake up now because it's already too late.




posted on Aug, 14 2016 @ 03:04 PM
link   
a reply to: SeekingAlpha




*mic drop* by Seeking Alpha



posted on Aug, 14 2016 @ 04:03 PM
link   
a reply to: SeekingAlpha

What percentage of animal species have gone extinct since the beginning of life on earth? It seems part of the life cycle of earth. It's not climate change killing animals anyway. It's the consumption of their habitats due to human encroachment. How many species have gone extinct since the start of humankind. What is the punishment for having their blood on our hands? Humans are just a natural result of evolution...

More serious question, how many dire environmental predictions have came true? That's why many people don't take the predictions serious. The environment movement has cried wolf too many times without solving and addressing the real cause of animals going extinct.


edit on 14-8-2016 by neutronflux because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2016 @ 04:09 PM
link   
a reply to: SeekingAlpha


Better wake up now because it's already too late.


If it's already too late, exactly why is it so important to 'wake up'?

I drove by a burned-out house the other day. Should I have called the fire department?

TheRedneck

ETA: a reply to: BuzzyWigs

This should answer your original question as to why I cannot support the present Global Warming arguments.

edit on 8/14/2016 by TheRedneck because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2016 @ 04:16 PM
link   
I would think the leaders of the world would desire all to be as successful as they are and have private jets. It seems environment activism is about a political elite making the rest of us living equally miserable why they jet around?



posted on Aug, 14 2016 @ 04:37 PM
link   
It's about damage control now. If you really study this issue, the projections are that if we somehow deal with our pollution issue now, it will take about 30-40 years for the planet to heal itself.

To use an analogous example, picture the world as your car. You know that the engine has issues and it needs to be replaced. Do you spend the $3000-$4000 to replace the engine now or do you ride it longer and have the engine blow along with dealing with other car issues that would deem it a total loss.

But unlike a car, we don't have the option of buying a new one. So we either deal with it now or we are all screwed if we don't. Actually, we are not screwed....our children and grandchildren are the ones that are screwed.

This begs the question, can you live a life that is not about you, but about your future generations? By the looks of the responses in this thread that answer is "no" for many people that have responded to this topic. Sadly, there is a large population in this world that prove we are not that evolved as a species to fully comprehend how big of an issue this really is. Some of these people post on this board.



originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: SeekingAlpha


Better wake up now because it's already too late.


If it's already too late, exactly why is it so important to 'wake up'?

I drove by a burned-out house the other day. Should I have called the fire department?

TheRedneck

ETA: a reply to: BuzzyWigs

This should answer your original question as to why I cannot support the present Global Warming arguments.



posted on Aug, 14 2016 @ 04:37 PM
link   
It's about damage control now. If you really study this issue, the projections are that if we somehow deal with our pollution issue now, it will take about 30-40 years for the planet to heal itself.

To use an analogous example, picture the world as your car. You know that the engine has issues and it needs to be replaced. Do you spend the $3000-$4000 to replace the engine now or do you ride it longer and have the engine blow along with dealing with other car issues that would deem it a total loss.

But unlike a car, we don't have the option of buying a new one. So we either deal with it now or we are all screwed if we don't. Actually, we are not screwed....our children and grandchildren are the ones that are screwed.

This begs the question, can you live a life that is not about you, but about your future generations? By the looks of the responses in this thread that answer is "no" for many people that have responded to this topic. Sadly, there is a large population in this world that prove we are not that evolved as a species to fully comprehend how big of an issue this really is. Some of these people post on this board.



originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: SeekingAlpha


Better wake up now because it's already too late.


If it's already too late, exactly why is it so important to 'wake up'?

I drove by a burned-out house the other day. Should I have called the fire department?

TheRedneck

ETA: a reply to: BuzzyWigs

This should answer your original question as to why I cannot support the present Global Warming arguments.



posted on Aug, 14 2016 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: SeekingAlpha

So... now it's not too late? We can still fix it? Wow, that's a relief!

I think I get it now. I should ignore the post that says it's too late and listen to the post that says we can still fix it. So when someone tells me we need to impose arbitrary limits on energy production so poor people can't heat their homes in the winter, I'm supposed to ignore those too because the same people will tell me different in a few minutes. Right?

I'm probably just confused, though. [/sarcasm]

(Not sure when, but somebody's will get this post eventually)

TheRedneck



posted on Aug, 14 2016 @ 04:54 PM
link   
a reply to: SeekingAlpha

If it was a serious problem. The elite could use air separation units, and other means, to capture atmospheric co2.



posted on Aug, 14 2016 @ 04:57 PM
link   
Strange we still produce record crops and life expectancy is increasing. What is going to do use in?



posted on Aug, 14 2016 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

No, no, no, we tried that! The smart people said raising taxes on energy was the only way to fix the problem.

(We need a sarcasm tag.)

TheRedneck



posted on Aug, 14 2016 @ 06:08 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Oh, the one where the rich get even richer and fly more private jets? Strange the elite get mad when the common person drives the same gas guzzling cars?

You would think the concerned would pay out the noise to set up the co2 scrubbers?
edit on 14-8-2016 by neutronflux because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2016 @ 08:15 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

On a serious note...

Back when the Global Warming hysteria began, I wondered if some of my previous research (creating inexpensive highly-charged ionic solutions) could be used to create gasoline from hydrogen and carbon dioxide. I worked out the chemical equations that said yes, under certain conditions I could convert carbon dioxide to charged carbon and that into methane. I could then use conversion stages to lengthen the hydrocarbon chains and create heavier compounds a'la gasoline.

Theoretically, it worked. Water + air = gasoline.

When I began designing the unit, however, I ran into a snag that forced me to scrap the idea. The amount of air necessary to produce one gallon of gasoline at 100% efficiency was astronomical. Astronomical as in having to scrub the Jet Stream at 100% for several hours. Completely impractical, by orders of magnitude.

But not all was wasted. It made me think: if the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is so small as to be completely impractical to produce enough gasoline for my use alone, how can it be so dangerous? My answer today after many years of trying to answer that question is: it's not.

The science says it's uncertain. That's because science is held to the scientific method (as is proper). Uncertain means unproven. Unproven means unusable. Scientific opinion can operate outside that container, but it carries no scientific weight. It's just an opinion.

And my opinion is that carbon dioxide levels in the range we see does not induce the amount of warming we claim to be experiencing, any more than spitting in the ocean causes measurable sea level rise.

TheRedneck



posted on Aug, 14 2016 @ 08:24 PM
link   
a reply to: SeekingAlpha

Climate change isn't even close to doing what you are crying about. Pollution is not climate change.

There are so many bigger fish to tackle when it comes to poisoning the earth. If we tackle those things like adults then any human caused climate change will be negated.

You are confused and it shows.



posted on Aug, 14 2016 @ 11:00 PM
link   
a reply to: raymundoko

In just a couple hundred of years of years human activity has caused the CO2 levels to rise to levels not experienced in millions of years....this is a significant event and highly likely to have climate implications.

This is a cause for concern.



posted on Aug, 14 2016 @ 11:09 PM
link   
a reply to: raymundoko

How do you think the Syrian Civil War started? It's the first climate change war of its kind on this planet and it won't be the last. Think about the mess this created dealing with immigration and political instability around the world. The crazy part is that this came from one country. Now, imagine one or two regions where several countries fall apart because of climate change. Millions will die because of this and you will be impacted by this in one fashion or another within the next 20 years.

So yes, this issue is gravely serious.
edit on 14-8-2016 by SeekingAlpha because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2016 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: SeekingAlpha

Whoa, whoa, whoa!

The Syrian Civil War is caused by carbon dioxide levels? Please explain how those two things are related?

TheRedneck



posted on Aug, 15 2016 @ 08:47 AM
link   
a reply to: jrod

It is not a significant event. Pollution is, the rise in co2 is not. Even the IPCC report from 2015 says we are not in bad shape and won't be for quite some time. I linked that data earlier. Suprisingly, we are doing quite well right now from a co2 perspective.

Deforestation, community sprawl, methane, coal fired power plants, extensive damming...they are all destroying the environment far worse than co2. If we tackle those, everything else falls into place.

Edit: Direct PDF link to science.house.gov


Nine Environmental Issues that need our attention now:
Energy
Fresh water
Phosphorus and other essential minerals
Habitat destruction
Invasive-species control
Endangered species
Pollution by directly toxic substances
Fisheries
Forests

edit on 15-8-2016 by raymundoko because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2016 @ 09:11 AM
link   
a reply to: pthena

I thought something similar reading it the first time: why the heck did I never hear of this before? Could've spared me a lot of trouble.

Thanks for sharing! Your uncle's saying is a perfect analogy for the whole issue, I'll keep that in mind.



posted on Aug, 15 2016 @ 09:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: PublicOpinion

Can you give me the paragraph number (or at least page number) where this is mentioned? We may be thinking two different things.

TheRedneck


Guess we are. Here is the full citation I pulled the numbers from (link is working again).

But I still get your argument regarding biased data, that's why I've added a raw data collection in this post. Kinda confusing, tell me how to continue our debate now.

Natural forcings are pretty well observed; sun-activity, vulcanos and stuff. We saw a mild cooling from those factors at the beginning of the 20th century, not a warming (last phase of the little ice age).
That's why I can't see your argument (regarding natural forcings) holding any water as of yet. I'd like to see some data to acknowledge your point and I'm curious to see what you're thinking of. PlanetX?










top topics



 
20
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join