It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Many years ago there was talk of getting rid of the sprays on products such as hairspray, deodrants, polish etc and go onto pump sprays, well that never happened
originally posted by: Mach2
a reply to: neoholographic
I assume you are referring to the "green new deal"? What a joke. Excellent example of politicians that have grandiose ideas, with no real plan, or vision of the ramifications. Sound bites to sway those who don't question the effects of the policy.
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: schuyler
WHY did scientists feel the need to HIDE a trend line that suggested the OPPOSITE of what they wanted us all to believe?
No data was hidden. It was and always had been readily available.
No. It was a matter of obtaining permission to publicly release some data which was propitiatory. It was also a matter of people not understanding what the "raw" data which CRU used was in the first place.
It was deliberately hiding the data.
They used it because it fit well with observations.
and yes, the tree ring data "went wonky," to use your scientific term, so how can they use it AT ALL
originally posted by: Jimjolnir
I think that the faster we learn to give land back to nature and learn to live with it, instead of controlling it, the faster we will sort out the mess we've created. Just my opinion.
originally posted by: pthena
a reply to: neoholographic
This is the real hoax of climate change. If we just give most of our wealth and control of our lives to Governments they can change the climate. Why would anyone fall for such nonsense?
Nope. The real hoax is that people keep voting in people endorsed by and financed by corporate dollars, specifically coal and oil.
The government's role is to set standards and limits to CO2 output, and fine the crap out of violators. But when Kyoto was on the table and the 2000 election took place and Oilmen Bush and Cheney had the door open for Enron and such ilk to set energy policy, there was no way in hell that the U.S. would sign on to Kyoto.
What do we have now? Anti-regulation goons in key cabinet positions like EPA, Interior, Energy. So failing coal gets subsidies from the taxpayers so the CEOs and stockholders don't lose profits.
It would certainly be better if Corporate money and propaganda were banned from politics. Then maybe fossil fuel shills wouldn't get elected. Then the EPA, Energy, and Interior could put required limits in place and fine the hell out of violators.
Guess what? If fines were high your taxes could be lower. Yaaaa! Lower taxes! Tax the rich 1%. Maybe they would pay their employees better. Maybe the CEOs will take a salary cut and refuse bonuses to stay under $10,000,000 per year to stay out of a higher tax bracket. Win, win.
originally posted by: sapien82
Climate change or not , we all agree that government are finding ever more ways to tax us for something that is a result of their government and their inability to regulate industry!
Air pollution is a real thing so is environmental degradation, we will succumb to toxic rain , air and water
so will the animals and when they are gone we will suffer a great loneliness of spirit!
I wouldn't be surprised if the whole thing is to pollute the planet to tax us for breathable air and clean water
while they all live in fancy off world colonies in low earth orbit , and we work for generations to pay of global debt !
the arguement isn;t what if its real or not , the argument is , what are they going to do about it , apart from tax us ?
Taxing us isnt the answer ,its just a way to cash in on this generation and the next and next until we do something about them !
its the industry and CEOs who dont pay taxes and push money to government and lobby to bend legislation and give tax breaks to them!