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.

 

500 Prominent Scientists warn U.N.---There is NO Climate Emergency

page: 4
83
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 25 2019 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: sapien82

Your thoughts on fracking. Don't talk about it unless you can see both sides of the story

greengarageblog.org...




posted on Sep, 25 2019 @ 09:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: TiredofControlFreaks
a reply to: sapien82

How about you just take a visit to a third world country that does not have a stable energy source and live there for about 6 months.


Try spending 6 months in one that relies on coal

And then take a look at your lungs .....

Even in the USA around 7,000 people die a year due to coal pollution alone. This is what comes of still using Victorian technology and not embracing the advances of the past 100 years

And I am quite sure were it not for the Saudis we'd have developed cold fusion decades ago.

The Elite want us to remain in the smog. So we stay blind.
edit on 25-9-2019 by AndyMayhew because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2019 @ 09:28 AM
link   
a reply to: AndyMayhew

How about if the climate activists stop setting impossible goals for fun and political profit and allow third world countries to use nukes?????

By the way, I grew up in a country that used coal. So go live in the third world country without fossil fuels why don't you.



posted on Sep, 25 2019 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: queenofswords




It seems the Climate Change Agenda that seeks to upend the world's entire economic priorities is causing some real problems.


It seems you guys have no idea what quantitative easing looks like. Welcome to 2008, old farts! Still struggling to make sense of your planned economy in the Brave New USSA, eh?

Too big to fail, anyone?
Capitalism?
Free markets?

"It's the economy, stupid!"

Right. So we better don't save the planet with allegedly expansive Green New Deals cuz we will be broke, which is clearly worse than to die and simply go extinct. Or, which would be even more horrific, we could accidentally change this polluted planet for the better for no good reason at all in case it wasn't greenhouse gasses but Nemesis heating up the system. Right!

Wait. What? That's fcking hilarious!



All scientists ARE NOT on the same page. But the push by the Agenda-makers that seek Big Climate Slush Funds to dip their power-grabbing fingers into are milking it for all its worth. Just stop it already.


All climatologists are on the same page, right? I couldn't care less about your prominent collection of meth-cooks and corporate spindocs, to be frank. Just stop pushing their agenda?
edit on 25-9-2019 by PublicOpinion because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2019 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

right so the evidence of increased pollution of the water table and droughts is a big indicator that its bad straight off the bat!

pro's be damned



posted on Sep, 25 2019 @ 09:54 AM
link   
a reply to: AndyMayhew

I am well aware of the effects of the industrial revolution living in Glasgow the evidence is still on most of the buildings here

and no longer wish to return to the industrial revolution



posted on Sep, 25 2019 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

Sorry what is your point ?

I have basically stated that the only reason we continue to pollute and destroy our world and habitats is for profit
and I am against the blatant destruction of the environment and all life on the planet.

I am not sure what your point is ?



posted on Sep, 25 2019 @ 10:00 AM
link   
a reply to: sapien82

well that is it then.

You are convinced that the pro's do not outweigh cons and the only way for civilization to survive the coming catastrophic warming?

Well have I got an idea for you.

Why are the climate warming faithful waiting for politicians to take action and begging for our money. Why don't you all just start living without fossil fuels right now, all on your own inititive and at your own cost.

Stop drinking water that has been treated with the use of fossil fuels
Stop living in housing that is made of anything less than wood
Use a horse and buggy for tranportation
Grow your own food and farm as chemical free as you like. Plow with a horse and not a tractor
Wear only cotton clothes and use leather from your farm animals for your shows.

Do it guys....join the amish



posted on Sep, 25 2019 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

where was I 40 years ago , not even on the planet , short of 4 years

What exactly am I wrong about , I basically outlined that the worlds governments and corporate entities only care about making money at the expense of every living thing on the planet .

How is that any different from saying that " renewables and climate change " was co -opted by government and corporate entities to extort money from taxes and also to steal resource wealth from developing nations.

During my time at university and my studies in Environmental toxicology I joined many protests about the environment in Glasgow and over Scotland, and continue to support groups who protest against the rampant increase in the destruction of the world.

is that ok with you ?



posted on Sep, 25 2019 @ 10:03 AM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

I am convinced that any system which has a negative impact on the environment no matter how good the short term long ,term gains are , is not worth the effort .



posted on Sep, 25 2019 @ 10:04 AM
link   
a reply to: sapien82

global warming is a fraud. Lets get on with developing technology that will clean up pollution or prevent in the first place. Lets be grown ups and understand that we do have a footprint on the earth and nothing we need to survive like fossil fuels is all good or all bad.

Bu the way, during the industrial revolution, the uk burned the dirtiest coal so that they could sell the cleanest coal abroad. You know that was wrong, right.

And again, a little end of pipe pollution control would have made a big difference. Just like when we learned not to add lead to gasoline to control engine knock.



posted on Sep, 25 2019 @ 10:06 AM
link   
a reply to: sapien82

really?

So how do you heat your home? Do you have a car? Do you operate a cell phone?

Beliefs don't go far when they are inconvenient, do they?



posted on Sep, 25 2019 @ 10:07 AM
link   
a reply to: AndyMayhew

Luckily for me Scotland has completely reduced its coal production, they even closed down the last coal generator at long Ganet


a few of my friends and my friends fathers worked there !
my girlfriends grandfather was even the site Chief operator


The plant opted in to the UK Transitional National Plan, placing limits on its sulphur dioxide, nitrous oxides and particulates emissions. The plant tested additional technologies that could have permitted it to operate beyond 2020 under the EU Industrial Emissions Directive.[1][11] The station closed on 24 March 2016.[3][12][13]



posted on Sep, 25 2019 @ 10:10 AM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

I dont know why you think I am against using technology to fix our problems, I am not
I am just against using technology that exacerbate the problems or develop others which we are not yet aware of.

You mean technology like this


reactor turns greenhouse gas into liquid fuel

I am all in support of Scotlands renewable energy directive to achieve 100% renewable energy from offshore wind and wave farms to produce 100% renewable energy consumption in every Scottish home by 2030



posted on Sep, 25 2019 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

I heat my home from natural gas , as there isn't a another fuel efficient way to heat your home in the UK that I am aware of

my electricity is supplied by a renewable energy supplier here in Scotland

I dont drive and never will .

My phone is second hand smart phone which I got from my friend, I havent bought a phone in at least 10 years
edit on 25-9-2019 by sapien82 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2019 @ 10:14 AM
link   
a reply to: sapien82

well for one thing, your world view is rather immature.

Do you really believe that there is no government out there that is so short sighted that money is the only concern. That there people who wear only black hats and others that wear only white hats and they can be easily identified by their occupation.

In the 1950s, lake erie was declared dead. Fish could not live in it because of the amount of sewage that was being discharged into it. Raw sewage was running in the ditches and disease was rampant

The Ontario Government of the day and ever since decided that they would build the infrastructure to divert sewage and water treatment facilities. It cost a lot of money.

Lake Erie is now an active fishery (sure there are hotspots that need be cleaned up yet and the work continues)and disease is controlled.

That was politicians who supposedly only care about money that spent those tax dollars and took good care of their constituents.

So were they wearing black hats or white ones.



posted on Sep, 25 2019 @ 10:16 AM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

Yes the end consumer is a problem , but the source is the issue

and that source is intimately linked to the global economy and also the government

we cant just abandon the fossil fuel industry at the drop of a hat , it would lead to global financial crash.

The system in my opinion has been set up in such a way that government , energy conglomerates
will make money from the transition from fossil to renewable
at the cost to the tax payers
all of this in between is just the par for the course.

I wouldn't be surprised if #ing the planet is intentional so we can be charged for clean Oxygen and clean water
and also to force us into controlled habitats.

All so a profit can be made from the working masses



posted on Sep, 25 2019 @ 10:18 AM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

Why is my world view immature ? that is your opinion based on one statement that I am for the betterment of humanity and the planet

if that is immaturity to you then I am baffled.



posted on Sep, 25 2019 @ 10:20 AM
link   
a reply to: TiredofControlFreaks

Oh look the government fixed a polluted lake , rather than tackling the source of the pollution!

Again throw a band aid on something , because implementing environmental protections hurts the bottom line of big corporations who deal in energy or heavy industry.
I guess that is what happens when you have senators taking campaign donations for tax breaks or whatever gig they have set up in the US



posted on Sep, 25 2019 @ 10:22 AM
link   
a reply to: sapien82

Natural gas is a good clean fuel with the smallest pollution footprint.

Did you know that it is produced by fracking and that fracking is responsible for the reduction of emissions of green house gases in the US?

www.realclearpolitics.com...

So how are you going to heat your home in the winter in the future when fossil fuels are banned? Renewables are unstable and could let you down in the coldest week of the year.

How would you communicate without the fossil fuels that produced your phone (second hand or not) or the wires that transport electricity to your house or the asphalt that you walk on every day.

Go ahead. You have told me your beliefs....now why are you living without fossil fuels right now?

And if you dare to tell me that society makes it impossible for you to survive without fossil fuels...remember... you have supported a political system that denies the use of fossil fuels to third world children. If they can do it, why can't you?



new topics

top topics



 
83
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join