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.

 

Global warming conspiracy?

page: 1
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 01:22 PM
link   
We have long been inundated with theories about the "threat" of gw, and about how man, as a species, is mostly responsible.
I would like to raise a couple of points in regard to this and would welcome any feedback.
First, are we so arrogant that we have to believe that we MUST be the major culprit with regard to alleged gw. Could it not be the case that we are minor contributors to a "problem" that is still unproven to a large degree. Many other species produce huge amounts of much more potent "greenhouse" gasses.
Second, why are we not being given all the facts? why is there not a level field when it comes to debate? why are the doubters (of which there are many) shouted down, abused and discredited?
Third, why is evidence against gw suppressed, changed, or edited to obscure the meaning of what the doubters are really saying

I would argue that the western world is so terrified of losing its economic monopoly to emerging industrial nations that they seek to inspire fear across the globe in order to preserve the status quo, the attitude being "we've got ours, but you can't have yours" or else you will "destroy the planet"

Scientists earning grant money from gw studies are terrified of losing it, so they build up the doom mongering whilst callously shooting down any dissenting voice.

Studies showing many different reasons for temperature change (if indeed there is any) are quashed or ignored or discredited.

Phenomena such as the urban heat island effect are ignored.

The list goes on.

Are we all such gullible fools that we are prepared to believe everything we are told about this?

Western governments told us about Saddams WMD we didn't believe that, so why should we believe them now.....
As previously stated, I would argue that this is less about protecting the environment than about governments and corporations wanting to maintain their economic status, and continue to feather their own nests at the expense of the populace........




posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 01:38 PM
link   
We'll never know. On either sides there are scientist claiming to have proof of their postotion and on either side there are people to claim the scientists are being bought and on either side there is censored facts, manufactured facts, and lots of money to be made. Both sides are completely filled by people hitting each other in vain with foam covered bats to prove something that with an infinite amount of science cannot be absolutely proven or disproven.

For many its become a faith issue. A new religion if you will.

One thing I know for sure is politicians and special interest groups are making out like bandits. For the sake of the starving grad-student I hope the war goes on forever and the grant money never stops flowing from either side.

For everyone else I hope a reasonable level of calm, common sense kicks in before we legislate, tax, and speculate our way out of this world.

Not since the crusades have so many people gotten enraged over speculation. Its quite amazing. And quite frightening.

I for one, dont buy into it any firther than that the UN will creep in and push for a global tax. Thats my immediate concern. Anyone who read the Kyoto Protocol would feel the same way. Its something I dont have any proof of but plenty of speculation and conjecture. Eh, I guess we're all guilty.

[edit on 6-2-2007 by thisguyrighthere]



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 02:36 PM
link   
Personally I believe it they stop using the Harrp program that they put into place everywhere---that things will get a lot better. I believe it heats things up everytime they use it. I also believe it greatly messes with the weather patterens.



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 03:46 PM
link   
The only conspiracy here is the one to suppress science so that profits continue to grow.


Originally posted by budski

First, are we so arrogant that we have to believe that we MUST be the major culprit with regard to alleged gw.

Arrogance has nothing to do with it. GW isn't alleged and the conclusion has been drawn that we are the cause. The human role in climate change is no longer debatable.



Could it not be the case that we are minor contributors to a "problem" that is still unproven to a large degree.


How is it not proven?



Many other species produce huge amounts of much more potent "greenhouse" gasses.

For example?



Second, why are we not being given all the facts?

Which facts are missing?



why is there not a level field when it comes to debate? why are the doubters (of which there are many) shouted down, abused and discredited?

The only major doubters I've ever seen are getting paid big bucks from the oil industry.



Third, why is evidence against gw suppressed, changed, or edited to obscure the meaning of what the doubters are really saying

WRONG. It is the evidence that supports GW and the CO2 cause that is being suppressed change or edited.



I would argue that the western world is so terrified of losing its economic monopoly to emerging industrial nations that they seek to inspire fear across the globe in order to preserve the status quo, the attitude being "we've got ours, but you can't have yours" or else you will "destroy the planet"

The economic loss will be from oil companies and other polluters.



Scientists earning grant money from gw studies are terrified of losing it, so they build up the doom mongering whilst callously shooting down any dissenting voice.

Like how much money? Exxon was paying ouyt way more than the climatologist on a government grant.




Are we all such gullible fools that we are prepared to believe everything we are told about this?


No I don't believe anything you have said. It contradicts all the facts.



Western governments told us about Saddams WMD we didn't believe that, so why should we believe them now.....

Uh the White House is being confronted by nearly 800 of it's scientists saying they were told to downplay global warming.



As previously stated, I would argue that this is less about protecting the environment than about governments and corporations wanting to maintain their economic status, and continue to feather their own nests at the expense of the populace........


Governments and corporations are keeping up the profit by pollution. Trying to reduce emissions could hurt their bottom line, not the opposite.



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 04:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Umbrax
The only conspiracy here is the one to suppress science so that profits continue to grow.

exactly one of the points i made


Arrogance has nothing to do with it. GW isn't alleged and the conclusion has been drawn that we are the cause. The human role in climate change is no longer debatable.

popular opinion masquerading as fact is not actually fact

How is it not proven?

see above


For example?

termites and bovine species produce massive amounts of methane



Which facts are missing?

lots of them - i'll get a list and come back to you - i know this sounds like a cop out, but i honestly don't have time right now




The only major doubters I've ever seen are getting paid big bucks from the oil industry.

as are environmental scientists by the green industry, and it has become an industry



WRONG. It is the evidence that supports GW and the CO2 cause that is being suppressed change or edited.

a group of neutral scientists recently wrote to the governments involved in climate change voicing concerns that their work had been mis-represented to a large degree. A well respected Danish (and also a russian) think tank was ignored when it's findings did not coincide with the popular view




The economic loss will be from oil companies and other polluters.

exactly my point, with the addition that major industries will be affected




Like how much money? Exxon was paying ouyt way more than the climatologist on a government grant.

scientists are also paid by the green industry in a business estimated to be worth 9 billion dollars





No I don't believe anything you have said. It contradicts all the facts.

and this again is a point i was trying to make - it's all about belief rather than fact - it's called GW "theory" for a reason - theory is not fact





Uh the White House is being confronted by nearly 800 of it's scientists saying they were told to downplay global warming.

heard tony blair lately?




Governments and corporations are keeping up the profit by pollution. Trying to reduce emissions could hurt their bottom line, not the opposite.

yes, at the expense of emerging nations wanting a slice of the pie - another point I made - keeping their own profits whilst trying to deny them to others by using GW as a political tool

thnx for your input, some of your answers are sound and have given me more idea's on the political nature of the debate and it's consequences.
These are not necessarily my beliefs, that i have written, but the point has to be made that there are 2 sides to every debate.....

btw you don't have to be quite so confrontational, after all - if we can't talk in an unexcitable rational manner, what chance do we have of reaching a concensus?



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shar
Personally I believe it they stop using the Harrp program that they put into place everywhere---that things will get a lot better. I believe it heats things up everytime they use it. I also believe it greatly messes with the weather patterens.


harrp, one of the main reasons for harrp, may be the future problems we face. but thhe public do not know one thing that harrp can do. if it did come out of the montauk project than anything is possible that it is doing.

for me its just a climate change, due to the sun. though the british government would try to tell us different.



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 04:52 PM
link   
a few items to peruse

www.amhersttimes.com...

www.jamesspann.com...

www.spiked-online.com.../site/article/1782/

www.shoutwire.com...

www.renewamerica.us...

www.worldclimatereport.com...

some a bit more light-hearted than others, but some valid points made all the same



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by budski

We have long been inundated with theories about the "threat" of gw, and about how man, as a species, is mostly responsible.
I would like to raise a couple of points in regard to this and would welcome any feedback.
First, are we so arrogant that we have to believe that we MUST be the major culprit with regard to alleged gw. Could it not be the case that we are minor contributors to a "problem" that is still unproven to a large degree. Many other species produce huge amounts of much more potent "greenhouse" gasses.
Second, why are we not being given all the facts? why is there not a level field when it comes to debate? why are the doubters (of which there are many) shouted down, abused and discredited?
Third, why is evidence against gw suppressed, changed, or edited to obscure the meaning of what the doubters are really saying

I would argue that the western world is so terrified of losing its economic monopoly to emerging industrial nations that they seek to inspire fear across the globe in order to preserve the status quo, the attitude being "we've got ours, but you can't have yours" or else you will "destroy the planet"

Scientists earning grant money from gw studies are terrified of losing it, so they build up the doom mongering whilst callously shooting down any dissenting voice.

Studies showing many different reasons for temperature change (if indeed there is any) are quashed or ignored or discredited.

Phenomena such as the urban heat island effect are ignored.

The list goes on.

Are we all such gullible fools that we are prepared to believe everything we are told about this?

Western governments told us about Saddams WMD we didn't believe that, so why should we believe them now.....
As previously stated, I would argue that this is less about protecting the environment than about governments and corporations wanting to maintain their economic status, and continue to feather their own nests at the expense of the populace........


1. how exactly does global warming help western governments???
2. DO you think before you speak?
3. the other side of the arguement could very esaily be, how could we be obessesed with out owen perfection as to think that we could never aid in the causing of a major problem, beceause the truth is even though we are in a warming trend, we are releasing significant amounts of carbon dioxide, the average U.S citizen releases 20 tons/yr, European 10 tons/yr, Australian and Canadian 16 tons/yr. I believe the finally human output is something like 330 million tons, although i cant get a scientific source for that from google. IF anyone has a sicentifically backed number that would be great.

Carbon Dioxide
Carbon Dioxide Graph



posted on Feb, 6 2007 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by budski

We have long been inundated with theories about the "threat" of gw, and about how man, as a species, is mostly responsible.
I would like to raise a couple of points in regard to this and would welcome any feedback.
First, are we so arrogant that we have to believe that we MUST be the major culprit with regard to alleged gw. Could it not be the case that we are minor contributors to a "problem" that is still unproven to a large degree. Many other species produce huge amounts of much more potent "greenhouse" gasses.
Second, why are we not being given all the facts? why is there not a level field when it comes to debate? why are the doubters (of which there are many) shouted down, abused and discredited?
Third, why is evidence against gw suppressed, changed, or edited to obscure the meaning of what the doubters are really saying

I would argue that the western world is so terrified of losing its economic monopoly to emerging industrial nations that they seek to inspire fear across the globe in order to preserve the status quo, the attitude being "we've got ours, but you can't have yours" or else you will "destroy the planet"

Scientists earning grant money from gw studies are terrified of losing it, so they build up the doom mongering whilst callously shooting down any dissenting voice.

Studies showing many different reasons for temperature change (if indeed there is any) are quashed or ignored or discredited.

Phenomena such as the urban heat island effect are ignored.

The list goes on.

Are we all such gullible fools that we are prepared to believe everything we are told about this?

Western governments told us about Saddams WMD we didn't believe that, so why should we believe them now.....
As previously stated, I would argue that this is less about protecting the environment than about governments and corporations wanting to maintain their economic status, and continue to feather their own nests at the expense of the populace........


1. how exactly does global warming help western governments???
2. DO you think before you speak?
3. the other side of the arguement could very esaily be, how could we be obessesed with out owen perfection as to think that we could never aid in the causing of a major problem, beceause the truth is even though we are in a warming trend, we are releasing significant amounts of carbon dioxide, the average U.S citizen releases 20 tons/yr, European 10 tons/yr, Australian and Canadian 16 tons/yr. I believe the finally human output is something like 330 million tons, although i cant get a scientific source for that from google. IF anyone has a sicentifically backed number that would be great.

Carbon Dioxide
Carbon Dioxide Graph



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 09:32 AM
link   
It is just a massive conspiracy by China, Russia and Europe to stagnate US economic growth while saturating people's minds with ideas of guilt and destruction.



posted on Feb, 7 2007 @ 09:51 AM
link   


This thread ranks right up there with the "I have a three-eyed green alien in my bathtub" threads.

:shk:

Good luck, folks.

Looks like we're gonna need it.



posted on Feb, 12 2007 @ 07:04 AM
link   
It is not how much Carbon Dioxide we release that is the issue, but where it goes and what it does. Natural sources of CO2 far exceed ours ( mount St Helens for example) on an ongoing annual basis.

The recent "summary for policy makers" report from the ICCT and the previous efforts miss out some interesting factors.

All the assumptions have attached probabilities.
The medeieval warm period, 3 centuries of temps 3-4 degrees warmer than today (sound familiar)is ignored because if it is included the computer models don't work....( i.e. no human induced warming- warming yes but ?????)
The last ice age is reported in the previous ICCT report to have been preceeded by an increase in CO2 level and this is stated as a fact and used as direct evidence. Unfortunately (and don't trust me go look it up) this is completely and utterly wrong and in fact the last ice age was followed by the increase in CO2. In fact when pieces of the antarctic ice fall off there are decayed trees and leaves underneath ( how did they get there ????=?)

Universal constants are stated in the report to be used at double their real value as determined experimentally( mentioned in the preface and glossary as well) But this is ok as it is mentioned ----= ??

What is being done here I don't know, nor do I know why. What I do know is that we have to start questioning these "facts" and do it now before this new religion taxes us out of existence.

Let us not forget almost exactly 30 years ago the UN "scientists were predicting we were heading towards the next ice age at a precipitously high speed. All the computer models said so.. Sound familiar again.

3000 years ago the Romans and 2000 years ago the vikings had vinyards in Northern Europe including the UK and Norway....HHHmm would that be so bad.....

Lets us not be lead like sheep let uis force these "scientists to give us the information not just they wish us to have ... Library of congress is for us all remember......



posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 09:28 AM
link   
IPCC of course knuckle head ...lol



posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Arrogance has nothing to do with it. GW isn't alleged and the conclusion has been drawn that we are the cause. The human role in climate change is no longer debatable.


Just like the holocaust is no longer debatable?..

Global warming has not been proven to be real, let alone to be the result of us humans our pollution.

I feel that i should warn you and others, that the UN is as corrupt as any other organization or government structure.

Global warming is going to be used for two things;

1) To be abused so that more control can be gained over us. The UN already owns alot of American soil, aswell as many other spots of natural beauty.

2) To shield any idea that the Earth is undergoing NATURAL change due to a NATURAL CYCLE, which is also related to 2012.


There is always room to be wrong. To claim you are totally correct and that no other opinion is valid is just plain ignorance.

More over, where is the concrete evidence that we are responsible? The science used to compile the conclusion that GW is real is just a pure joke.

Just like with 9/11, cherry picked science is used to justify an agenda or point. its that simple.


It should be obvious anyway though. I mean, it was known 15+ years ago, yet we are only hearing about it now...and we have been bombarded with it recently. Ask yourself WHY NOW. Could it have anything to do with the crazy weather of late?...



posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 11:14 AM
link   


It should be obvious anyway though. I mean, it was known 15+ years ago, yet we are only hearing about it now...and we have been bombarded with it recently. Ask yourself WHY NOW. Could it have anything to do with the crazy weather of late?...


Actually, I heard about it when I was about 10, 20 years ago... but if you believed it then, you were considered a crack pot looney...

I'm just wondering what it's going to take. First it's 20% of scientists, then it's 50%, then it's 80%... now it's like 91%.

First there's no evidence, then there's not enough evidenve, then the evidence is all made up.

It's simply amazing the degree that people will lie to themselves to feel better about something. It's like having a giant tumor on the side of your head and insisting it's just a pimple and it will go away naturally. It's just a cycle.

Talk about deny ignorance...



posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 11:24 AM
link   
@budski

So what is fact? When an overwhelming majority of scientists and researchers believe and support something, or when the facts of a situation meet the criteria that you have set for it. Introducing bias and a predetermined judgement?

Are you really going to compare termites and cows to 40,000 coal power plants and 60 million cars? Not even including the other sources. Also, lets make something clear. Production of gasses alone do not warm things, producing more than the planet is capable of handling will. So all the termites and cows thave have been developing for millenia are part of the balance. Introduce 5 million percent more emissions in 20 years and now the balance isn't so balanced any more. Take and deforest about 30% of the earth's surface and guess which direction that takes us again?

As far as making money, there's as much money to be made one way vs. the others. For every dollar an oil company looses, one will be made by a green company.

Normally I'd get all annoyed by this line of thinking. It's obvious some people have determined that they don't believe it before they even had facts, but I've watched the numbers of the educated grow.



posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 11:50 AM
link   
Like ive said many many times on ATSNN I have a B.Sc degree in environmental management, if anyone is not sure on the reality of the situation vis a vis humans contribution to the Global Warming debate please U2U me and I will be happy to provide the basic high school science needed to understand how the process works and how considering our behaviour it is truly impossible for humans not to be big contributers to this problem.

The Theories all fit

The evidence is proven beyound a doubt (the IPCC report saying 90% ish percent sure was watered down to that to allow some of the contributing authors to return home to PAID jobs in their universities, after campaigming by the US and oil companies to stop the truth that is percieved by IPCC members that is 100 % PROVEN)

Except the evidense or U2U me and i will help you understand.

Strange how this anti GW post is once again by someone who has only just joined and not posted before, bit of a pattern that, like the facts of the reserach the patterns show the truth behind the surface!

Regards

Elf.



posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 04:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by sp00ner

It's simply amazing the degree that people will lie to themselves to feel better about something. It's like having a giant tumor on the side of your head and insisting it's just a pimple and it will go away naturally. It's just a cycle.

Talk about deny ignorance...


Im not lying to myself, not at all. I understand that pollution is bad for the environment, and if we can cut down pollution, then thats a fantastic step forward.

However. Linking pollution to the idea of Global Warming is something i just don't buy. Especially since all the focus is on CO2, when methane is 10x worse compared. Where is the attention on Methane?

Also, trying to relate pollution to the climate isn't going to work, simply because we don't have a long enough period of time to make any valid conclusions. 100 years of polluting industry is nothing on the grand timescale of the planet. Climate has changed ON ITS OWN in the past, what makes you so sure this current climate change is any different?

One hurricane has more energy than all the nuclear weapons on the planet combined. One volcano eruption can produce more CO2 than all of us combined over a short time period. Is it so silly to suggest then that we have a relatively minor impact on climate? 60 million cars mite seem like alot, but on the scale of things, its not really.

Theres also one little fact you don't hear often, and thats that the other planets in our solar system are also experiencing climate shift. its not just Earth!

But in the end, it all comes back to the Sun and its activity IMO.



posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Theres also one little fact you don't hear often, and thats that the other planets in our solar system are also experiencing climate shift. its not just Earth!

But in the end, it all comes back to the Sun and its activity IMO.


Lots of claims completely absent of evidence...

The criticism about how we can't make any valid conclusion about climate change on earth because we only have over 100 years of directly observed data, yet we can make a valid conclusion about climate change in the solar system (from how many years data?) is an interesting approach.

Methane is assessed as a greenhouse gas. In fact, it is a stronger GG than CO2 and also breaks down in the atmosphere to CO2 (it has a short half-life c.f. CO2). It hasn't increased in concentration for over a decade, yet warming continues...



posted on Feb, 13 2007 @ 05:08 PM
link   
No, there is plenty of evidence, and someone has already compiled it here on ATS; www.abovetopsecret.com...

If other planets are undergoing change at the present time, aswell as the Sun itself, what does that tell you about Global Warming here on Earth.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join