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.

 

Nancy Pelosi Announces Plans For A House Climate Crisis Committee

page: 2
27
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 06:54 PM
link   
So we need to make bills to take more money from the people of the US, for BS crap where they can jam any pork they want to.

But they dont want to fund a wall that would pay for itself in 2 years and free up hundreds of billions to use on programs that actually help the country

We dont need another democrat committee thats going to need to be funded ........Or a republican for that matter
edit on 12/28/2018 by ManBehindTheMask because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 07:00 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

I can verify that she likes the climate in Hawaii

freebeacon.com...



posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 07:01 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

I just find it amusing that a bunch of Democrats will sit in a room and emit a bunch of hot CO2 about climate change.

If they were that interested in "fixing" it, then they could all go to Pelosi's district and take a dive off the bridge there, thus lowering their carbon footprint to zero.


edit on 28-12-2018 by Lumenari because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin




Not a popular view on this part of the web but I believe manmade climate change is the biggest challenge facing our species so i have to say I support this.


I agree with you on climate change, but I disagree on the committee. Taxation is not a method to solve climate change and liberals are as just guilty of misleading on this issue as are conservatives.

The globalists in the democratic party want to be able to crush people with taxation. With global revolts, there will come global government to quell them. PLEASE pay attention to what is happening in France, Democrats here have a very similar agenda and that isn't an accident. You will find, however, that while Democrats actively pursue this policy, Republicans only tacitly approve behind closed doors. There's a reason for that too.

We need to focus our efforts in science and engineering. All government can do is choke the life out of innovation. I don't trust the idiot that said "We have to pass it to find out what's in it" and meant that # seriously.



posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 07:06 PM
link   
a reply to: whywhynot

Pelosi is the typical hypocritical democrat. She doesn't give a flip about The American People...or so-called climate change. She is a hateful obstructionist with her own agenda in the land of fruits and nuts and illegal voters.




This is not Pelosi's first holiday vacation to Hawaii. In 2011, it was reported by the Hawaii Reporter that Pelosi had in previous years stayed in a $10,000-a-night suite at the Four Seasons Resort in Kona for her holiday vacation.




posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 07:06 PM
link   
What I don’t get? Governments love wasting money, and fear the effects of CO2? Yet, not a single government has completed construction of a CO2 capture unit to remove CO2 from the atmosphere. But California has their billion dollar high speed rail project. Talk about priorities.....



posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 07:09 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux

Should tell you something about the mentality of people pushing these agendas.



posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 07:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Tarzan the apeman.
a reply to: xuenchen

If they can do this without asking for any more money then great. I don't trust giving any more of my hard earned money to a wasteful government. They can take a long walk off a short plank.



And if they "do it" on corporate levels, prices will rise and you will pay.

You will pay like you could never believe 😎

Your pocket will get picked and you won't even know how 😨



posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 07:10 PM
link   
Yes, we need to study solar activity & the impact of jet airplane's/freighter ship's on the atmosphere & hopefully ban them from traveling. This will bring the jobs back for sure. New gas/diesel automobiles are already burning fuel cleanly, so we don't have to worry about those. They should also investigate the negative effects of manufacturiong/recycling of batteries & solar panels on the environment. Thankfully CO2 is not classified as a pollutant. If we can find a way to emit more CO2 without visible particles in the air like with freighter ships and jet airplanes we can make the planet greener. Eliminating CO2 would kill the plants and make the planet less green.
edit on 28-12-2018 by JBIZZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 07:14 PM
link   
I think climate change is real. That being said, I don't think the climate change issue should be ignored just because someone else wants to profit from it. I wish we COULD ignore it and make it go away but we can't so let's deal with it while we still can.



posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 07:15 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Excellent. We need action on this, and I"m glad someone's paying attention to us scientists.



posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 07:16 PM
link   
a reply to: JBIZZ

Sounds like a backfire waiting to happen.

👀



posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 07:17 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Here is a sneak peek of the members of that committee.




posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 07:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Byrd
a reply to: xuenchen

Excellent. We need action on this, and I"m glad someone's paying attention to us scientists.


Financial "Scientists"

The worst kind 😎



posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 07:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Byrd
a reply to: xuenchen

Excellent. We need action on this, and I"m glad someone's paying attention to us scientists.


It is not the case that they are paying attention.

You're about to find out how little they do care for what scientists have to say.



posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 07:34 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen



We're screwed! Or at least the people who live near water.



posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 07:37 PM
link   
The 97% consensus on global warming

And the remaining 3% are paid shills for BIG Oil.



posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 07:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: Byrd
a reply to: xuenchen

Excellent. We need action on this, and I"m glad someone's paying attention to us scientists.


What kind of action do you suggest?



posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 07:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: highvein

originally posted by: Byrd
a reply to: xuenchen

Excellent. We need action on this, and I"m glad someone's paying attention to us scientists.


What kind of action do you suggest?


What ever the "actions" are, they will require that at least 3 billion people die.

😳



posted on Dec, 28 2018 @ 07:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
The 97% consensus on global warming

And the remaining 3% are paid shills for BIG Oil.


That has been debunked so many times I am surprised that anyone still tries to quote it in a serious conversation.


The 97% "consensus" study, Cook et al. (2013) has been thoroughly refuted in scholarly peer-reviewed journals, by major news media, public policy organizations and think tanks, highly credentialed scientists and extensively in the climate blogosphere. The shoddy methodology of Cook's study has been shown to be so fatally flawed that well known climate scientists have publicly spoken out against it,

"The '97% consensus' article is poorly conceived, poorly designed and poorly executed. It obscures the complexities of the climate issue and it is a sign of the desperately poor level of public and policy debate in this country [UK] that the energy minister should cite it."

- Mike Hulme, Ph.D. Professor of Climate Change, University of East Anglia (UEA)


97 Articles Refuting The "97% Consensus"

The actual number from the Cook study is about 3% of the scientists polled believe in AGW.

You know, the 3% that are indeed shills, but I doubt they work for Big Oil.

Hope that helped you so next time you won't be embarrassed by your own posts.


edit on 28-12-2018 by Lumenari because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join