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.

 

Warning to Humanity: 15,000 scientists say damage irreversible

page: 9
43
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 05:29 AM
link   
a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

agreed unless it affects them directly or to their immediate family , no one is willing to give up their earthly possessions or their way of life no matter how meager they will hold onto it because they cant let go!

Space maybe out of our collective reach right now , but then the Seas and oceans of earth are not !

there is a lot of space down there




posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 05:41 AM
link   
Anthropogenic global warming is a serious business and more isomorphic algorithms should take it seriously! I can prove to you how serious this is! Some years ago in a paper published in the highly-credible and non-disingenuous journal "Nature" some scientists ostensibly measured the radiative forcing impact from atmospheric CO2 (the primary greenhouse gas that we dirty humans emit) at the surface. This was measured and determined with some very high-tech equipment - specifically with an "Atmospheric Emitted Radiance Interferometer Spectra". This device apparently measures the radiative characteristics of gases in the atmosphere. These scientists measured a radiative forcing from CO2 at the planetary surface of 0.2 W/m2 from a 22 ppmv increase of CO2 - between the years 2000 and 2010. This corresponds to around 0.01 W/m2 of radiative forcing per 1 ppmv of CO2. However this would be a generous linear relationship to use today because CO2 is said to behave somewhat logarithmically. CO2 is also apparently increasing in the atmosphere at the rate of about 2.5 ppmv/year. So the annual radiative forcing from CO2 (at the surface) would be about 0.025 W/m2, which would be sufficient to raise the mean global temperature by just over 0.0046°C (per year) under the Stefan-Boltzmann law (assuming a global average surface temperature of 288°K). Watch out, people! Perhaps in 1000 years, we might start to see the effects!
edit on 20-11-2017 by Nathan-D because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 05:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Nathan-D
Watch out, people! Perhaps in 1000 years, we might start to see the effects!

Not me!!



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 05:56 AM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

My money's on Keith




posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 06:36 PM
link   
a reply to: purplemer

Don't HAVE to.
The system is TOO corrupt to give up the PETRO DOLLAR.
THE world should have been off GASOLINE engines in the 50s.
IF we were to flip last decade MAYBE it would have worked.
EITHER way, most data is spurious by political infection.
ONE might have BETTER luck defining GOD.
edit on 20-11-2017 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: purplemer

If you KNEW my history YOU would KNOW why I don't DO numbers,AT all because I CAN'T.
OTHERWISE I'd be at S4 or Darpa.



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 07:49 PM
link   
Thank You for reminding me that I need to water my tree growing in the living room.

I just bought an energy efficient refrigerator also. I don't have any incandescent light bulbs, not one, and I picked up some trash at the local river with my daughter's girl scout troop. I still need to put some gasoline in both vehicles I own though.

I have kids, my ancestors also had kids, that is why each and every single one of us is here to this day.

Blah, blah, blah. Same old story, we are ruining everything, it's too late, humanity is doomed. I do what I can with what I can afford to do. Until real products are affordable and attainable by us normal average Joe's, I believe that big business is the driving force for unsustainable resource consumption.

Offer me a viable affordable vehicle that I can drive hundreds of miles per day/week to get me to work and back, then we can talk.

We are so horrible for wanting to live a comfortable lifestyle. We all need to be living in caves roasting our bean stalks on a fire, wait what if everyone burned a fire to eat, would that be bad.

My ramble might seem pointless, but I think it's pointless to keep screaming from the mountain that we are all doomed.



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 08:08 PM
link   
Humans will find a way to overcome these "problems", we always have. If we were to believe every scientific fear-mongering "study", 2/3 of the population should be dead right now because there isn't enough food to feed us all! Yet, here we are, proving those "scientists" wrong, yet again. And if we can't overcome this "problem", then we will be wiped out and these liberals and scientists will get what they want, an Earth without humans, win-win. For the record I'm not against science, but being a scientist doesn't mean you are right, most scientists throughout history have been totally wrong, and I'd wager these "scientists" will be proven wrong as well.



posted on Nov, 21 2017 @ 03:16 AM
link   
a reply to: cavtrooper7

Calm down dude. Plant some seeds..





posted on Nov, 21 2017 @ 03:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: purplemer

If you KNEW my history YOU would KNOW why I don't DO numbers,AT all because I CAN'T.
OTHERWISE I'd be at S4 or Darpa.


Its all very well not doing numbers but if that is the case you should revoke opinon on the issue. It is based on numbers..



posted on Nov, 21 2017 @ 03:34 AM
link   
a reply to: TruthxIsxInxThexMist

Hey TruthxIsxInxThexMist: Wow, that's a lot to type just to say hello!
I think you've written a very important thread and addressed a very important topic. And yet, what do you think we should do about this overpopulation issue? Are you willing, personally, or to appoint anyone by proxy, to decide who is worthy of living or dying? I'm not. Nor am I willing to sterilize vast populations of women to ensure there is less breeding.

However, I agree with writing and reading these stats so that the populous will hopefully make its own informed choices.
I'm a believer in the idea of a cull going on, anyway. Having said that, I hate the idea of it, and don't agree with it, no matter how necessary it may seem.

I think there are sustainable ways to feed all of us, without sacrificing any other life to do so, if only we would invest in the ways to do this. But sadly, instead, we invest in controlling the masses of the most disadvantaged, and employ a thematic mechanism that says we must take opportunities (i.e.life) away from others, in order to survive.

Does it really have to be that way?
Regards,
tetra



posted on Nov, 21 2017 @ 08:05 AM
link   
a reply to: tetra50

Well, as I said before... there are groups of people living on this planet who we can do without as they are a menace to society.. so we can start with those.



posted on Nov, 21 2017 @ 11:23 AM
link   
a reply to: purplemer

As I am a warrior THIS IS calm.
WE don't have the correct math anyway.
The DATA is politically FUDGED time and TIME again.



posted on Nov, 21 2017 @ 01:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: purplemer

As I am a warrior THIS IS calm.
WE don't have the correct math anyway.
The DATA is politically FUDGED time and TIME again.


You would not know if you dont do numbers. Your comment becomes mute as you wont even look at the data. Its what i do have spent many years measuring species decline. But you somehow know better without even looking..

Wake Up!



posted on Nov, 21 2017 @ 01:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: TruMcCarthy
Humans will find a way to overcome these "problems", we always have. If we were to believe every scientific fear-mongering "study", 2/3 of the population should be dead right now because there isn't enough food to feed us all! Yet, here we are, proving those "scientists" wrong, yet again. And if we can't overcome this "problem", then we will be wiped out and these liberals and scientists will get what they want, an Earth without humans, win-win. For the record I'm not against science, but being a scientist doesn't mean you are right, most scientists throughout history have been totally wrong, and I'd wager these "scientists" will be proven wrong as well.


We are not finding ways to overcome these problems. We are wiping out ecosystyems. We are causing damage that cannot be repaired.



Wake up



posted on Nov, 21 2017 @ 06:35 PM
link   
a reply to: purplemer

TO WHAT only PEER reviewed obstructionism.MONITARY obstructionism OR deep black obstructionism?

NICE high horse...



posted on Nov, 22 2017 @ 12:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: TruthxIsxInxThexMist
a reply to: tetra50

Well, as I said before... there are groups of people living on this planet who we can do without as they are a menace to society.. so we can start with those.


What happens when it is decided that YOU are among the next group of people deemed unnecessary?



posted on Nov, 22 2017 @ 01:52 AM
link   
a reply to: 727Sky

space colonies. o neil type. at lagrange points 1-6. start one on moon too.

SEIG ZEON and the spacenoid race.



posted on Nov, 22 2017 @ 02:06 AM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

There is no L6.



posted on Nov, 22 2017 @ 06:02 AM
link   
a reply to: yuppa

I thought space as well but the sea is where we should focus our attention



new topics




 
43
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join