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.

 

72nd Session of the United Nations' Sustainable Development and Implementation of Agenda 21.

page: 3
43
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 06:44 AM
link   
a reply to: ravenshadow13

No i don't need to come up with a better plan because every single piece of the "crisis" agenda 21 is supposedly about mitigating doesn't actually exist...

Thank God too because if it did agenda21 would make it exponentially worse... On top of that whole turning the world into an authoritarian grinding hell of poverty disease starvation and overcrowdingfor the overwhelming majority of us!

Honestly their plan makes feudalism and the dark ages peasant life seem preferabe!

Especially since it's entirely based on fraud lies and evil evil people seeking power control and total dominance....

Scarcity is bullshi*

AGW is bullshi*

And like i said... Everything they're wanting to do would be extremely destructive to humanity the environment natural resources etc!!!




posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 07:09 AM
link   
a reply to: roguetechie

Thank goodness there is no grinding poverty, disease, starvation, or overpopulation in this world of ours.



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 07:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: roguetechie

Scarcity is bullshi*

Of course, which is why we all have access to infinite resources.

I'm just off to fly a few solid gold helicopters into the sea for a giggle.

I might deforest a few million square metres of rainforest after that, as it will never run out, will it?



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 09:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: TheScale

originally posted by: rickymouse
a reply to: ravenshadow13

I think they should ban a lot of the unnatural chemicals they have created that are dampening the worlds ability to repair the ecosystem. This includes to some extent CO2 emissions to a certain extent, especially the stuff that comes from all those jets flying around.


if your worried about the ecosystem and c02 destroying it i wouldnt give that a worry at all. one thing thats great about C02 emissions is that we have a huge abundant source of life forms that consume c02 and give us beneficial byproducts in every environment on earth. what id be more worried about are the herbicides, pesticides, insecticides, etc that makes it ways into our waterways and groundwater supply from modern agriculture. on top of that much of the fertilizers we use in modern agriculture releases large amounts of greenhouse gases with nothing to really soak it up and buffer it out other then time unlike with c02.


Trees and plants take up CO2 and turn it into oxygen we breath. I am not worried about CO2 unless they poison the environment so the plants cannot do their job. Even weeds do the CO2. When they get done with the soybean and corn fields they cannot grow anything, that is a major problem. The chemicals that we make wind up in the rivers and poison the lakes and ocean. Humans create a lot of this chemistry, it is not at all like what any other animal in nature can do. We are poisoning the ecosystem, once we do that, then carbon emmisions can be a problem. If we just quit poisoning the earth, the added CO2 will actually help things grow.

Humans. with their advanced intelligence can destroy this planet's ecosystem and we are doing it. Heating our homes is not a problem, heating a mansion is, waste and ignorance is a problem. Even concentrated natural chemistry can poison nature, we were better off having a bunch of small slaughter houses and farms than big ones. We are better off having a yard full of weeds than nice grass that needs lots of water and nitrogen. For being an advanced race of beings, we are pretty stupid.



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 09:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: FatherLukeDuke

originally posted by: roguetechie

Scarcity is bullshi*

Of course, which is why we all have access to infinite resources.

I'm just off to fly a few solid gold helicopters into the sea for a giggle.

I might deforest a few million square metres of rainforest after that, as it will never run out, will it?
Well for one thing scarcity is something which was dreamed up by Thomas Malthus who was related to Darwin. Malthus believed that only the healthy and wealthy should breed so you should thank him for eugenics as well. But back to scarcity. Malthus believed that truly there wasn't enough food for all the world, but surprisingly modern advances in agriculture fixed that problem. We still have plenty of food but distribution continues to be a problem. That is why socialists thought that if they could change the economic system of the world then people would get fed. Have you ever heard people talking about how the restaurants and groceries waste so
Much food and throw it away when they could just give it away. Ok so then let's talk about Peak Oil. That one was dreamed up by oil moguls who use scarcity to raise prices on oil. It's not that we are running out of oil and oil is not from dinosaurs anyway. These people capped the wells which still had oil in them. That's just two parts of the puzzle we are talking about. When the elites talk about overpopulation they mean everyone but them.
Enter Obamacare ... that's their solution... death panels and such. It's completely monstrous. And like Rep Louie Gohmert said in the House yesterday, health insurance is not health care.
Oh I gotta go to work. Laters



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: [post=22 Why should Idiots get to have all the unprotected sex they want then just abort the consequences. They should use protection or keep their junk in their pants. Survival of the fittest. Let the ignorant in the world wipe themselves out. A child doesn't ask to be concieved, these women saying it's their body they can do what they want. How is an unborn child considered to be nothing and disposible. You cant save the world. Everything will play out the way god intended. If the world wasn't filled with godless people it would be a better place.



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 12:34 PM
link   
OP thanks for posting this.

I'm someone who is very passionate about this subject, especially as my travels around the world have put a lot of things into perspective for me.

In places like Turkey, many people there seem to be conversant about the plan for the NWO. People in Ireland, Chile, even Bulgaria and India have discussed this with me.

People the world over know something is up.

It's all about putting the pieces together and seeing the bigger picture. Some people see parts of it--and the job of those who "get it" is to help them see the whole picture.

I can't believe there are people on this board who don't get it. There's no unseeing it once you see it.

The problem is, which no one has mentioned,-is that the people in control of this agenda are psychopaths. Even murderous. Many are pedophiles.

Remember that 1% of the elite own 85% of the worlds wealth.

How do you nonbelievers explain that?

That's the question of the day.



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 12:43 PM
link   
a reply to: [post=22667727]7Elect[/post
Agree 100% you are dead spot on!!! We can't be responsible for these people that procreate ad nauseam. In nature hawks will not procreate when food sources drop. Humans are supposed to be cognizant beings. I think women would prevent pregnancy but in third world countries they get rapped and put out to birth on their own. Maybe if we armed the women they would get rid of these men that rape. Just saying.



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 12:44 PM
link   

edit on 15-9-2017 by Ansuzrune because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2017 @ 12:47 PM
link   
a reply to: MRuss

First please clarify what you mean by non-believers and then tell
Me why it matters that a few own most of the wealth and how that relates to Sustainable Development. Thanks
edit on 15-9-2017 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: Auto correct



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 11:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Teikiatsu

The planet will be doing fine long after humanity goes extinct. As for resources, our technology has always found new resources to exploit, leaving a trail of creative destruction. This is why the coal industry died. Access to resources has always been the fundamental cause of war. In earliest times it was water and arable land, lately it has been petroleum, and soon it will be rare earths. Now that humanity is aware of its global scope, perhaps it is time to consider options that can avoid the possibility of a civilization destroying conflict?


HHmmm... nope.

Technology and the market have been working out well so far. It only gets screwed up when a handful of people in the government think they know better than the creative power of the human race.


I assume you are very young, and don't remember acid rain and Lake Erie catching fire. You also don't seem to understand that the history of humanity has been one of constant slaughter over access to resources. Either that, or you consider a toxic environment and continual warfare to be "working out well."


You assume wrong.

Basic environmental regulations (and the regs from the 70s are basic and effective) are not the same as restricting human productivity and economics.


How do you feel about child labor laws? The forty hour work week? Should we get rid of those governmental restrictions on productivity and economics? The fact is, no private enterprise has voluntarily acted in the best interests of anyone but themselves without public pressure or government regulation. You have drunk the " free market" koolade.


Last I checked, kids can still work. Last I checked, my corporate job didn't stop me from working more than 40 hours.

You are correct, private enterprise will do what they can for their advantage, like everyone else. That includes keeping quality labor on staff or losing it to a competitor.



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 12:16 PM
link   
Maybe the REST of the planet got smoked by the BS of Agenda 21 and is willing to pay carbon taxation and trust humanity to produce a messianic person without fault to lead us all globally ...
Guess I am intelligent enough to point out how dictators have operated SO far,regardless of how effective or NICE a plan makes you feel,once that ONE person takes the reigns.



posted on Sep, 16 2017 @ 12:47 PM
link   
I think this topic is one of the better ones for ATS.

Its fascinating how quickly people will support something just because of the words used to describe it. Then, its just as interesting how those same people will accuse others as being against the entire concept of those words when they say something like Agenda 21 has little to do with how its marketed.

They love using buzzwords like "sustainable" and "green" and "smart," and many will not look any further. Who could be against sustainability and smart stuff?

Surely, no one would ever take advantage of the public's positive associations with certain words.


The worst part is the "strategies" that are actually contained in things like Agenda 21 misdirect and even prevent discussions on how to actually achieve things like sustainability, smart growth, and green technology. It works hand in hand with AGW, which rarely involves anything more than talk about funding and money.

Its really interesting what people will not only buy into, but zealously defend all based on flowery, feel-good language.



posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 06:49 AM
link   
a reply to: Serdgiam

It is also interesting how people will reject something for the same reason. Once you forget that the United Nations is an entirely symbolic organization and begin to believe it has some sort of real power, it can become the scaffold for all manner of fantasies.



posted on Sep, 17 2017 @ 09:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: DJW001

originally posted by: Teikiatsu

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: Teikiatsu

The planet will be doing fine long after humanity goes extinct. As for resources, our technology has always found new resources to exploit, leaving a trail of creative destruction. This is why the coal industry died. Access to resources has always been the fundamental cause of war. In earliest times it was water and arable land, lately it has been petroleum, and soon it will be rare earths. Now that humanity is aware of its global scope, perhaps it is time to consider options that can avoid the possibility of a civilization destroying conflict?


HHmmm... nope.

Technology and the market have been working out well so far. It only gets screwed up when a handful of people in the government think they know better than the creative power of the human race.


I assume you are very young, and don't remember acid rain and Lake Erie catching fire. You also don't seem to understand that the history of humanity has been one of constant slaughter over access to resources. Either that, or you consider a toxic environment and continual warfare to be "working out well."


You assume wrong.

Basic environmental regulations (and the regs from the 70s are basic and effective) are not the same as restricting human productivity and economics.


How do you feel about child labor laws? The forty hour work week? Should we get rid of those governmental restrictions on productivity and economics? The fact is, no private enterprise has voluntarily acted in the best interests of anyone but themselves without public pressure or government regulation. You have drunk the " free market" koolade.


Last I checked, kids can still work. Last I checked, my corporate job didn't stop me from working more than 40 hours.


Kids can still work, but their employers are constrained by child labor laws. Has that ruined the economy? Unlike in Europe, there is no cap on the hours salaried employees can be forced to work.


You are correct, private enterprise will do what they can for their advantage, like everyone else. That includes keeping quality labor on staff or losing it to a competitor.


You do not seem to be dealing with the real world very much. Most retail and service businesses are not interested in retaining quality labor; on the contrary, they seek to reduce labor costs, settling for lazy, sullen, and otherwise disinterested employees who are willing to work for minimum wage, counting on employee turnover to maintain their bottom line.



new topics

top topics



 
43
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join