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.

 

Walk the Walk if the climate is really that important.

page: 2
17
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 02:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing
I agree. I have Solar Panels on my House, I recycle, I vote for politicians that take renewable energy and pollution seriously I have a motorcycle for commute to cut down on my gas consumption when I can.

It's funny how people that believe in man made global warming in the US get called alarmists and worse etc or that we're in a cult. But i'm just over here like, NASA said this these actual scientists said that, this group of climatolgoists said this...this research paper said that. How am I wrong for believing scientists? LOL


So you based your entire life on what someone else said.

It's wrong because science doesn't deal in absolute's.

Might want to look up the scientific method.



The scientific method is a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge.


en.wikipedia.org...

However if people want to run around like a bunch of chicken littles.

Feel free, but don't expect everyone else to jump on that bandwagon.

edit on 15-1-2018 by neo96 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 02:41 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

The electric bill is generally the 2nd largest bill in a house, and happens to be the one besides the 'rent' people can buy their way out of. So I argue people should strive to do such just like getting out from under the banks.

Meanwhile CO2 is going up, isnt natural, therefore we shouldnt toy with it any more than we must.

Of course for most that take a conscious position on that tidbit means FREAK OUT even though on a macro scale there's not too much to be done too quick. But just because it'll take time we shouldn't be brazen about it either.

All in the mix there are ways for little people to save money along the way, and larger sound investments for players to get at and this is how it should be being presented to everyone.

Instead, the Two Party + MSM System Model is to stoke one side with pure emotional alarmist appeal, which gets them attacking everyone else, everyone else whom then takes a defensive posture about it, and the logical sense in the middle goes out the window. Just like with the wars, and identity, and you name it that ends up being pointed at us down party lines.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 02:41 PM
link   
You can do something about it, too O.P.

At any rate, I do agree, Trump and his team use quite a lot of private jets as well.

Trump's cabinet members are flying private jets like pampered Hollywood celebs — on your dime

There are five investigations into Trump Cabinet members’ private jet use

Sure, Trump is kind of one of those deniers, but his team still impacts the global climate.

At any rate, climate change is a serious issue, as I'm sure you will agree if you are alive in 30 years or so. There are already species going extinct that we could use for medicine or food or provide support for other species. Coastal cities and towns will have to deal with rising sea levels.

In my opinion, deniers and apathetic people (as you pointed out, even those who are concerned and in power don't do too much personally, although they do shape policies that have a greater impact on preventing climate change than their personal use, and especially compared to deniers or pro-climate change people like Trump) are going to mean that climate change has already reached a tipping point.

Are there going to be consequences? You bet.

I think we will have to develop some sort of technology to reverse the impacts of climate change or adapt to it once it becomes more obvious as opposed to trying to get deniers and pro-polluters on board with seeing the issues. We might have to use genetically engineered food and medicine, build levees, develop some sort of method of draining carbon out of the air, etc.


edit on 15pmMon, 15 Jan 2018 14:42:50 -0600kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)

edit on 15pmMon, 15 Jan 2018 14:44:39 -0600kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss




The electric bill is generally the 2nd largest bill in a house, and happens to be the one besides the 'rent' people can buy their way out of. So I argue people should strive to do such just like getting out from under the banks.


By going in to debt as solar power systems costs thousands of dollars. Not to mention billions in corporate subsidies.

Buy their way out of eh.




Meanwhile CO2 is going up, isnt natural, therefore we shouldnt toy with it any more than we must.


Plant some trees.

Plant a snipload for what a solar power system costs without the debt created.

That 'eat' co2.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 02:56 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

You buy it in pieces. Make the 'payments' to 'yourself' per se. Of course paying off the mortgage would come first. Then keep paying into Your System a couple more years as if paying your mortgage still. Then totally of The Machine (except comms).

Or just buy spinner rims next month instead. F it.




edit on 15-1-2018 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 02:58 PM
link   
a reply to: darkbake


Trump and his team use quite a lot of private jets as well.

I think the point is the hypocrisy. It is not hypocritical to do something unless you claim doing it is bad for everyone else.

TheRedneck



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 03:00 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

Uhh, what specifically are you complaining about? I think your point was that if climate change is so bad, then high level officials should use teleconferencing instead of flying to meet each other. If so, then you're in luck because these groups use teleconferencing too! But not all meetings can take place through teleconferencing, particularly ones that include workshops & other "in person" things (like networking, which is often more effective in person than online).

Here are a few quick examples I found just from a quick google search.

Exhibit A: A review from a 2014 IPCC meeting (HERE)

Review of the IPCC’s Evidence of Human-Caused Global Warming

Dates: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 - 12:00pm to 1:30pm
Location: Washington, DC and Teleconference

Review of the IPCC’s Evidence of Human-Caused Global Warming Brown Bag Lunch/Teleconference
February 12, 2014, 12:00 NOON – 1:30 PM (Eastern Time)


Exhibit B: From a 2010 article that's ironically about how the IPCC can improve itself lol (HERE):

"To me the fundamental problem was that when the error was found it was handled in a totally and utterly atrocious manner," Watson told the committee, gathered at McGill University in Montreal, Canada, by teleconference.


If you'd like to ask them specifically why they don't exclusively require teleconferencing in order to lower their own carbon footprints, here's a link to their contact info (from their official site):

www.ipcc.ch...



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 03:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: amazing
I agree. I have Solar Panels on my House, I recycle, I vote for politicians that take renewable energy and pollution seriously I have a motorcycle for commute to cut down on my gas consumption when I can.

It's funny how people that believe in man made global warming in the US get called alarmists and worse etc or that we're in a cult. But i'm just over here like, NASA said this these actual scientists said that, this group of climatolgoists said this...this research paper said that. How am I wrong for believing scientists? LOL


I believe in doing a lot of those things. I ride a motorcycle for commuting. Recycle. Etc, Etc, Etc. So while I care about the environment, it doesn't mean that I have to support redistribution of wealth and punitive taxation as a solution.

I have an issue with all the hysteria. Scientist purposely hiding and manipulating source data, etc also doesn't help my confidence either.



But that's just it. I'm not down with redistribution of wealth or more taxes either. But I feel like I have to listen to the Scientists on this one, and really. Besides Tax, everything else in the discussion is good and well worth discussing. Yeah? I mean If I came at you and said, let's have a discussion about pollution. You'd be cool with it, but if I say lets have a discussion about global warming you wouldn't be.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 03:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96

originally posted by: amazing
I agree. I have Solar Panels on my House, I recycle, I vote for politicians that take renewable energy and pollution seriously I have a motorcycle for commute to cut down on my gas consumption when I can.

It's funny how people that believe in man made global warming in the US get called alarmists and worse etc or that we're in a cult. But i'm just over here like, NASA said this these actual scientists said that, this group of climatolgoists said this...this research paper said that. How am I wrong for believing scientists? LOL


So you based your entire life on what someone else said.

It's wrong because science doesn't deal in absolute's.

Might want to look up the scientific method.



The scientific method is a body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge.


en.wikipedia.org...

However if people want to run around like a bunch of chicken littles.

Feel free, but don't expect everyone else to jump on that bandwagon.


And you're correct and I know that gravity isn't absolute either but I listen to what scientists say about it. I know that evolution isn't absolute either but I listen to what scientists say about it. I don't know anything about carbon dating or anything like that but scientists tell me the earth is older than 10,000 years. I listen to them about it. maybe I shouldn't?



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 03:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Sorry, you are either on their side, or your not. there is no middle ground here. But the good news is, the Kool Aid is cherry this week!







posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 03:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: darkbake


Trump and his team use quite a lot of private jets as well.

I think the point is the hypocrisy. It is not hypocritical to do something unless you claim doing it is bad for everyone else.

TheRedneck


I do agree, which is why I pointed out that Trump was a climate change denier. Even though I'm not positive he is, based on what I've seen in the media.

But my point was that the climate change deniers are just as dangerous to the climate, sometimes even more so. In this case, it doesn't matter if Trump is hypocritical or not, what matters is how much his administration affects the climate with their use of private jets. It seems to be about the same or worse than the Pope and his lackeys.
edit on 15pmMon, 15 Jan 2018 16:02:14 -0600kbpmkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
The POPE is a big voice in all this. He seems to think along the lines of most of the climate cult members. But then I read about him flying here, and flying there, on a big private plane.

I know it may be slightly off topic, but what you read is wrong, the Pope (or the Vatican) doesn't have a private plane, the planes are commercial planes chartered when necessary.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 04:02 PM
link   
a reply to: darkbake

Seems to me they do far more damage spraying the atmosphere with Aluminum Oxide to manipulate storm cells than entire nations burning coal.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 04:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: darkbake

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: darkbake


Trump and his team use quite a lot of private jets as well.

I think the point is the hypocrisy. It is not hypocritical to do something unless you claim doing it is bad for everyone else.

TheRedneck


I do agree, which is why I pointed out that Trump was a climate change denier. Even though I'm not positive he is, based on what I've seen in the media.

But my point was that the climate change deniers are just as dangerous to the climate, sometimes even more so. In this case, it doesn't matter if Trump is hypocritical or not, what matters is how much his administration affects the climate with their use of private jets. It seems to be about the same or worse than the Pope and his lackeys.


In Trump's defense, he doesn't seem to give a rats ass about Climate Change, so using him for an example is ...well.....bad. Mkay?



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 04:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: network dude
The POPE is a big voice in all this. He seems to think along the lines of most of the climate cult members. But then I read about him flying here, and flying there, on a big private plane.

I know it may be slightly off topic, but what you read is wrong, the Pope (or the Vatican) doesn't have a private plane, the planes are commercial planes chartered when necessary.


He flies Coach? Somehow, with the security and all, I just don't see that. But if I'm wrong, I'll give the Pope a break. After all, he is the pope.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 04:21 PM
link   
a reply to: network dude

If you look at the planes the Pope uses you will see that when he flies from Rome to some country he uses an Alitalia plane, and when he goes back he (usually) uses a plane from that country.



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 04:25 PM
link   
a reply to: ArMaP

But he and his entourage are all that's on the plane right? He doesn't fly with the people does he?



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 06:10 PM
link   
a reply to: darkbake


But my point was that the climate change deniers are just as dangerous to the climate, sometimes even more so. In this case, it doesn't matter if Trump is hypocritical or not, what matters is how much his administration affects the climate with their use of private jets. It seems to be about the same or worse than the Pope and his lackeys.

But the premise of the OP is the hypocrisy of the Global Warming advocates. Example: If I believed a bridge was dangerous if overloaded and tried to get a weight restriction passed on it, then it would be hypocritical of me to then drive a semi pulling a HOUSE across that bridge. I would be showing by my own actions that I really didn't believe the bridge was unsafe, because I would be risking breaking it myself. But if I believed the bridge was sound and then pulled the same load across it, that would not be hypocritical. I never said the bridge was unsafe, and I hadn't proved by my actions anything I hadn't said.

Now, Trump doesn't appear to believe there is a Global Warming problem... same as me. Al Gore says he believes there is a Global Warming problem. So if Trump flies around the country in a private jet (required by his position, incidentally), then he is doing nothing that disproves what he said. Al Gore, on the other hand, is proving himself a liar by his actions being contrary to his words.

So what we are left with are two impressions: Trump believes what he says he believes, and Gore does not believe what he says he believes. That means that, despite their words, neither believe in Global Warming.

Your premise of your point hinges on the assumption that Global Warming is an issue. I disagree. Therefore, I must reject your argument out-of-hand unless you can show me direct, irrefutable evidence that Global Warming is an issue, and is caused by carbon dioxide emissions, and can be corrected by correcting carbon dioxide emissions. If you can do that, you'll get your name in the history books, because thus far no one has been able to show irrefutable evidence of such.

TheRedneck



posted on Jan, 15 2018 @ 07:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
But he and his entourage are all that's on the plane right?

No, journalists usually also go on the plane, but they have to buy a ticket, as they are not part of the commitive.


He doesn't fly with the people does he?

What people would go with him on the plane? Vatican citizens?



posted on Jan, 16 2018 @ 03:27 AM
link   
a reply to: SkeptiSchism

Yup! SkeptiSchism figured it alll out guys. Close the thread and let all the energy companies know that it was all a sham. This random user on ATS has it figured all out for us.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join