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.

 

Bush Administration covers up truth about Global Warming

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 3 2006 @ 08:10 AM
link   


There is massive inequality in the world - such that anyone currently using a keyboard/internet connection cannot comprehend.



So...you are the only person on the planet that can comprehend it?

And the world isn't overpopulated. It's populated. There is more than enough money....extra money, wasted money on this planet to feed every starving person for the rest of their lives.

Instead we, the United States, for example, choose to waste money on bogus wars that we have no plans to win...only plans to continue. When that money could be better spent elsewhere. We have trillions of dollars "missing"....TRILLIONS! That's how reckless our "leaders' are!

You ask what people would be willing to compromise for changes. I would compromise a lot to know that the world will be safer for my children and their children, etc.....

This world could be a great place if it wasn't for the money-mongering International Banking Cabals that truly run it! Greed is the name of the game. Greed is what has caused the "inequality" you talk about. Greed causes some to have billions while others starve to death. This isn't capitalism...it's psycopathic greed!




posted on Dec, 3 2006 @ 02:05 PM
link   
Some words from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who has made environmental activism his lifework.



written in 2003:

George W. Bush will go down in history as America's worst environmental president. In a ferocious three year attack, the Bush administration has initiated more than 200 major rollbacks of America's environmental laws, weakening the protection of our country's air, water, public lands and wildlife. Cloaked in meticulously crafted language designed to deceive the public, the administration intends to eliminate the nation's most important environmental laws by the end of the year....

Today, George W. Bush and his court are treating our country as a grab bag for robber barons, doling out the commons to large polluters. Last year, as the calamitous rollbacks multiplied, the corporate-owned TV networks devoted less than four percent of their news minutes to environmental stories. If they knew the truth, most Americans would share my fury that this president is allowing his corporate cronies to steal America from our children.

source: "The Gospel According to RFK - Why it Matters Now" edited with commentary by Norman MacAfee - Copyright 2004 by Westview Press


According to RFK, Jr., George W. Bush will go down in history as America's worst environmental president!! These are times when we need leaders that care about our environment....not taking care of themselves and their cronies. The Bush administration doesn't give a damn about our environment...and, therefore, the lives or quality of life of the American people.

Just add it to the list of George W. Bush's crimes against humanity!



posted on Dec, 3 2006 @ 09:23 PM
link   
There are numerous respected scientists that maintain that Global Warming is a joke, and that the planet is merely going through a cycle in which temperatures fluctuate, as it has been doing throughout its entire history.



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 01:28 AM
link   
IMHO most people realise that there is a great deal of inequality with the socio economies of our modern society, however, that is not a major contribution when it comes to discussions on sustainability which is the major environmental problem.

Sustainability is not directly relevant to fiscal reserves, but is rather affected by things such as global warming, population growth, infrastructure etc. Soil erosion, depletion of minerals, cooling or warming of the earths core, increased uv rays and affects on produce and the environment let alone mankind, acid rain, thermal expansion are a few components of sustainability, and no matter how much money you have if you cannot grow a crop of rice, wheat, etc or find fresh sources of water you are not living in a sustainable environment or economy. If climatic conditions continue as they are, and they will as there is no way to reverse the hole in the ozone layer then there will continue to be an increase in both frequency and strength of many natural disasters, and unfortunately such things also have a roll on affect. For example, hurricane's - residual water is a breeding ground for mosquito larvae, climatic changes offer improved breeding conditions, and new strains of disease and infection etc are increasing, as this happens medication immunity is increasing and mans own immune system is becoming increasingly compromised.

As for the Bush administration covering up, I doubt they stand alone. When one considers the affects of a cover up compared to the affects of a grand scale panic, its obvious there is no easy solution. As for reducing greenhouse emissions, in many cases it is not possible to decrease in the areas of infrastructure, partially why several countries did not sign the Kyoto protocol. Another factor to consider is that many alternative fuel sources, i.e. wind farms, nuclear power etc, also produce greenhouse emissions contributing to the ozone problem, as well as other dangers to consider like toxic dumping, nuclear accidents.

There is just no easy answer, but a cover up of anything and by anyone is like a slap in the face to the people seeking to live in a democratic society. And yes I know, in reality there is no such thing as democracy.



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 01:30 AM
link   
I would be interested to read some further information about 'global warming being a joke'. Could you provide some links or sources for me please? Because I would love for the view I have to be proved wrong. Thanks.



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 06:27 AM
link   


There are numerous respected scientists that maintain that Global Warming is a joke, and that the planet is merely going through a cycle in which temperatures fluctuate, as it has been doing throughout its entire history.



I would love sources for this "joke" theory myself. If anyone in the scientific community is saying it's a joke, they are probably on the payroll of the companies that are causing the problems or on the payroll of this govenment that is trying to cover it up.

In other words, if they feel it is a joke, I would love to know what there true agendas are. "Respected scientists" may have differeing view points but I would be suspect of anyone thinking this was a "joke."

[edit on 4-12-2006 by Excitable_Boy]



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 08:16 AM
link   
www.hudson.org...

As you can see its a cycle that our earth , sun and plantery systems goes through every 1500 years .. Chill out ok



posted on Dec, 4 2006 @ 09:09 AM
link   
Thanks for the link, it really was an interesting read. I'm still a little sceptical based on the credentials of the men, but I shall pursue this line of thinking in due course to see what else I can find. Thanks again.



posted on Dec, 5 2006 @ 05:26 PM
link   
Harry Browne is what I'd call an environmental moderate. He's a Libertarian who has run for President, and his primary focus is reducing the scope of government. He's neither an environmentalist or an "environment be damned" kind of politician. He has decent plans for reducing pollution and such that would actually work much more efficiently than many of Whacko Nader's proposals. That's beside the point.

In his book, "The Great Libertarian Offer", Browne writes:

"In the 1970s, the prevailing wisdom was that gasoline prices would exceed $2 a gallon by the end of the decade, and the Arabs would soon own half the United States. In the 1980s the Arab threat miraculously disappeared (when the government removed its price controls on petroleum), and the Japanese became the new threat. They, too, were about to own most of the U.S. But then the Japanese economy suddenly went to pieces -- all by itself, with no help from the U.S. government.

"And there was the New Ice Age that was predicted in the 1960s. When that didn't come to pass, the alarmists decided that Global Warming made sense. What's next -- dangerously moderate temperatures?"

Browne continues on for a few paragraph, surmising that a lot of environmental issues have less to do with saving Planet Earth than they do with politics. The offered solution is always more government. Of course, as a Libertarian, this is Browne's main point.

He continues:

"The most popular scare story today is global warming. This is the idea that human beings, by selfishly driving their cars, are releasing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere -- causing the earth to heat up and leading to the melting of the polar icecaps, massive flooding, and the end of civilization as we know it.

"But over 17,000 scientests -- none of whom are affiliated with polluting industries -- have signed a petition to the U.S. government that says in part:

'There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.'

"The supposed struggle to save the planet is really a struggle for power -- power over your life. So politicians and environmental extremists never wait for their claims to be proven before demanding to turn your life upside down."


Now, go on and discredit all that I just recounted. Blah, blah, he's just a politician, doesn't know what he's talking about, etc. That's fine. If you'd like me to look up the 17,000 scientists that petitioned the U.S. government in opposition to the incorrect Global Warming theory, I can, but really I don't think it would be so difficult for you to Google it, if you're truly attempting to balance your education on the matter.

Everyone knows about Global Warming, it's taught in schools as truth. It's the other side that often needs digging up.



posted on Dec, 6 2006 @ 04:24 PM
link   


'There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.'



This is an interesting paragraph. I'm quite sceptical of this information for this reason: Carbon "Dioxide" of course isn't a problem. Carbon "Dioxide" causes plants to flourish. We also exhale Carbon "Dioxide." The problem is with Carbon "Monoxide." Carbon "Monoxide" is what cars emit and is quite poisonous. So this little game this author is playing makes me skeptical of anything else he might have to say......

Carbon "Dioxide" is not a greenhouse gas.....Seems this author is playing a little shell game.....This author threw in Dioxide instead of Monoxide so he could say how wonderful Carbon Dioxide is. Why don't you tell us what he has to say about Carbon Monoxide.......



Now, go on and discredit all that I just recounted. Blah, blah, he's just a politician, doesn't know what he's talking about, etc. That's fine


I'm glad it's fine and it was actually quite easy to do......



and the Japanese became the new threat. They, too, were about to own most of the U.S. But then the Japanese economy suddenly went to pieces -- all by itself, with no help from the U.S. government.


The U.S. did have their hand in this...indirectly through the FED! Russia fell to pieces the same way....


But back to Global Warming....a lot of it is simple common sense.

[edit on 6-12-2006 by Excitable_Boy]



posted on Dec, 7 2006 @ 12:54 PM
link   
I figure I'd add my thoughts to the mix here.

Global warming is but one theory. Not proven, but a theory. And after reading this article, I'm convinced now that what it says is true, that there is still not enough data recorded and the General Circulation Models(GCM's) used by researchers are not nearly sopisticated enough at this point to be able to produce an accurate model of the earths atmosphere. Its not that theres not enough research being done, its taht there are too many variables left out of these models being used for research because the models they use cant handle them all yet. So until better research comes around, I'm not convinced of global warming.

Global Warming: Fact or Fiction?



posted on Dec, 7 2006 @ 11:01 PM
link   
The Earth has had periods of shifting temperatures for its entire history. Its just part of how the planet works; it heats up for a while and then cools down. Mankind is arrogant indeed to think that a few emissions can cause the destruction of the climate.



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 06:56 AM
link   


Mankind is arrogant indeed to think that a few emissions can cause the destruction of the climate.



Nice job of ignoring the misinformation I picked up on in that fabulous book by Harry Browne.

No one is talking about destruction of the whole climate. We are talking about it being altered. Altered enough to cause drastic changes.....

Now tell us some more about that evil gas Carbon Dioxide!



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 02:43 PM
link   
I appreciate your intelligence and civility. I'll use no more quotes from independent politicians. Instead, let's look at the big list of causes of Global Warming, commonly accepted by environmentalists.

1. Carbon dioxide from power plants
2. Carbon dioxide emitted from cars
3. Carbon dioxide from trucks
4. Carbon dioxide from airplanes
5. Carbon dioxide from buildings
6. Methane
7. Nitrous oxide
8. Deforestation
9. City gridlock
10. Carbon in atmosphere and ocean

This list, complete with details, can be found at "Global Warming: The Causes", or here:
www.ecobridge.org...

Looks like carbon monoxide didn't make the list. I'm not sure where you get your information from.



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 04:02 PM
link   


1. Carbon dioxide from power plants
2. Carbon dioxide emitted from cars
3. Carbon dioxide from trucks
4. Carbon dioxide from airplanes
5. Carbon dioxide from buildings


It's Carbon MONOXIDE!! Not dioxide.....



carbon monoxide
–noun a colorless, odorless, poisonous gas, CO, that burns with a pale-blue flame, produced when carbon burns with insufficient air: used chiefly in organic synthesis, metallurgy, and in the preparation of metal carbonyls, as nickel carbonyl.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1870–75]
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.
American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source carbon monoxide
n. A colorless, odorless, highly poisonous gas, CO, formed by the incomplete combustion of carbon or a carbonaceous material, such as gasoline.

source: dictionary.reference.com...


This is what cars produce, trucks produce, power plants and other industrial complexes produce, ariplanes ,etc......CARBON MONOXIDE is the bad stuff quite clearly!!

Carbon Dioxide is what we exhale when we breath and is needed by plants to survive........NOT A CAUSE OF GLOBAL WARMING!



carbon dioxide
–noun a colorless, odorless, incombustible gas, CO2, present in the atmosphere and formed during respiration, usually obtained from coal, coke, or natural gas by combustion, from carbohydrates by fermentation, by reaction of acid with limestone or other carbonates, or naturally from springs: used extensively in industry as dry ice, or carbon dioxide snow, in carbonated beverages, fire extinguishers, etc.



Carbon Dioxide is present in the atmosphere on its own without the help of man. It is exhaled by animals and human beings. It's naturally produced by springs. Again...it helps plants grow. Sounds like a HORRIBLE gas.


Carbon MONOXIDE is what is given off by cars, trucks, planes, etc. etc. etc.....it's what pollutes the air from smoke stacks of industries all over the planet. MONOXIDE!!

Carbon Monoxide = POISON
Carbon Dioxide is good for the planet.......You mention deforestation above. You know why deforestation is bad? Because the trees produce oxygen which obviously is needed by everything on the planet. Carbon Dioxide is like a fertilizer to all plants and makes them thrive and give off MORE OXYGEN. Boy that sounds like some evil stuff that Carbon Dioxide which is in the soda I drink.....



Carbon monoxide has an indirect radiative forcing effect by elevating concentrations of methane and tropospheric ozone through chemical reactions with other atmospheric constituents (e.g., the hydroxyl radical, OH) that would otherwise destroy them. Carbon monoxide is created when carbon-containing fuels are burned incompletely.

source: en.wikipedia.org...


MONOXIDE!



Through natural processes in the atmosphere, it [Carbon Monoxide] is eventually oxidized to carbon dioxide.


So the atmosphere does naturally TURN Carbon Monoxide into Carbon Dioxide...which is a GOOD thing! But what comes out of cars, trucks, planes, smoke stacks, etc....is Carbon MONOXIDE!

Carbon Monoxide is still a bad thing, aka POISON!



The emissions produced by a vehicle fall into two basic categories:

Tailpipe emissions: This is what most people think of when they think of vehicle air pollution; the products of burning fuel in the vehicle's engine, emitted from the vehicle's exhaust system. The major pollutants emitted include:

1. Hydrocarbons: this class is made up of unburned or partially burned fuel, and is a major contributor to urban smog, as well as being toxic.

2. Nitrogen oxides (NOx): These are generated when nitrogen in the air reacts with oxygen under the high temperature and pressure conditions inside the engine. NOx emissions contribute to both smog and acid rain.

3. Carbon monoxide (CO): a product of incomplete combustion, carbon monoxide reduces the blood's ability to carry oxygen and are dangerous to people with heart disease.

4. Carbon dioxide (CO2): although this is a product of the complete combustion of hydrocarbons, is plentiful in the atmosphere, has no immediate harmful effects to humans and is essential to plant life, emissions of carbon dioxide are considered a pollutant because it is a significant greenhouse gas and source: en.wikipedia.org...


Let's use a car as an example (the same would be true for a truck or a plane, etc...) You have these emissions:

1. Hydrocarbons - which are TOXIC
2. Nitrogen Oxides - contributes to ACID RAIN
3. Carbon MONOXIDE - imagine that..there it is! MONOXIDE! - reduces the blood's ability to carry oxygen and dangerous to those with heart disease. People commit suicide by parking in their garages and closing the door with the engine running. Carbon Monoxide is produced from incomplete combustion which is true of all engines....I don't think an engine exists that is able to produce perfect combustion.
4. I'll give you that it lists Carbon Dioxide here...BUT:

A. it is only produced by complete combustion, which is next to impossible and
B. to quote above: "is plentiful in the atmosphere, has no immediate harmful effects to humans and is essential to plant life"

"increasing its levels in the atmosphere is thought by many to be a contributor to global warming."

Thought by many...but not by me. Just as many scientists think Carbon Dioxide is a problem as scientists that think it is not a problem. I'm on the not a problem side!

The real problems are with Carbon Monoxide, Methane, Nitrous Oxide and Fluorocarbons.


[edit on 8-12-2006 by Excitable_Boy]



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 05:28 PM
link   
I can't imagine what your source is. Every single website about global warming that I have looked at talks about Carbon Dioxide. And I looked at quite a few. Even government sites maintain that the problem is carbon dioxide.

You've quite confidently ridiculed me for bringing up carbon dioxide, and you used this to discredit my entire Harry Browne quote. However, the fact is, your point about carbon dioxide not being related to global warming seems to be founded on nothing at all. Every source I find talks about carbon dioxide, not carbon monoxide as you so vigorously proclaim.



posted on Dec, 8 2006 @ 05:34 PM
link   

4. Carbon dioxide (CO2): although this is a product of the complete combustion of hydrocarbons, is plentiful in the atmosphere, has no immediate harmful effects to humans and is essential to plant life, emissions of carbon dioxide are considered a pollutant because it is a significant greenhouse gas

en.wikipedia.org...

Sorry to intercede, but that line I bolded stood out for me in the context of this debate



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 08:16 AM
link   


emissions of carbon dioxide are considered a pollutant because it is a significant greenhouse gas



Hey Masqua...jump in any time!

I'll concede that some consider it a pollutant because it IS considered to be a greenhouse gas.....but I don't believe, as half the scientific community also agrees, that this particular gas is one that causes global warming.......it is too good for the planet. And because it IS so good for the planet, I wouldn't call it a pollutant.

Calling Carbon Dioxide a pollutant is like calling water a pollutant.



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 12:13 PM
link   
Perhaps. This would no doubt be the reason that global warming is a farce.

However, you've piqued my interest. Now that you've bashed my argument because I said "carbon dioxide" instead of "carbon monoxide", I'm highly interested in seeing your sources that describe carbon monoxide as being the cause of global warming. It may just be that I'm an inferior researcher, but every source I've found, including government sources, talks exclusively about carbon dioxide, and doesn't mention carbon monoxide at all.

You continue to go on about the fact that carbon dioxide is harmless and carbon monoxide is the alleged problem. What's your source?



posted on Dec, 9 2006 @ 03:40 PM
link   


It may just be that I'm an inferior researcher, but every source I've found, including government sources, talks exclusively about carbon dioxide, and doesn't mention carbon monoxide at all.

You continue to go on about the fact that carbon dioxide is harmless and carbon monoxide is the alleged problem. What's your source?



The atmosphere eventually turns Carbon Monoxide into Carbon Dioxide. It's a natural occurance in the atmosphere. This must be why they choose not to discuss Carbon Monoxide and only discuss Carbon Dioxide because CO turns into CO2 eventually anyway.......at least this is my guess. I find it highly bizarre that it is hard to find any information on the ill effects of CO. But, maybe it gets turned into CO2 BEFORE it causes any problems relating to global warming. But it certainly causes problems with regards to global breathing!

My sources are all listed above in my posts. I have nothing new to add at this time....no new sources at this time. But, I will continue to do research and get more information on CO vs. CO2.

Peace!!



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join