It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


NASA: Clean-air regs, not CO2, are melting the ice cap

page: 1

log in


posted on Apr, 10 2009 @ 04:52 PM
News Tip:

We're not going to pay carbon-taxes to Nazis/NASA or any type of man-made government, no matter how long the government blames us for causing their "mother gaia" (planet earth) to feel bad. We're not "useless eaters" or "guests" on earth.

New research from NASA suggests that the Arctic warming trend seen in recent decades has indeed resulted from human activities: but not, as is widely assumed at present, those leading to carbon dioxide emissions. Rather, Arctic warming has been caused in large part by laws introduced to improve air quality and fight acid rain.

Dr Drew Shindell of NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies has led a new study which indicates that much of the general upward trend in temperatures since the 1970s - particularly in the Arctic - may have resulted from changes in levels of solid "aerosol" particles in the atmosphere, rather than elevated CO2. Arctic temperatures are of particular concern to those worried about the effects of global warming, as a melting of the ice cap could lead to disastrous rises in sea level - of a sort which might burst the Thames Barrier and flood London, for instance.

Acid rain fixed, woo! Hey, what's that gurgling sound?

Shindell's research indicates that, ironically, much of the rise in polar temperature seen over the last few decades may have resulted from US and European restrictions on sulphur emissions. According to NASA:

Sulfates, which come primarily from the burning of coal and oil, scatter incoming solar radiation and have a net cooling effect on climate. Over the past three decades, the United States and European countries have passed a series of laws that have reduced sulfate emissions by 50 percent. While improving air quality and aiding public health, the result has been less atmospheric cooling from sulfates.

Full article:

More about occultists in NASA/Nazis:
Yorkshire CND - NASA and Nazis - Origins of the US Space Program ...
Interview with Slave who worked for NASA/Nazi scientists

Nazis Take Over NASA

The contamination of Nasa and the cia by nazi war criminals smuggled into the country in a top secret program called operation paperclip including ss officer wernher von braun who was personally decorated by Hitler for his atrocit(ies)

[edit on 10-4-2009 by News And History]

posted on Apr, 12 2009 @ 05:56 AM
i like it, but i reserve judgement, because the same NASA has released more than one questionable set of data, so this might just be another.

playing on boths sides of the fence to retain at least a semblance is objectivity. i won't agree with it, though because correlation does not require causation.

posted on Apr, 12 2009 @ 07:35 AM
Excuse me, but last I heard the ice caps were frozen solid. We are into a cycle of global cooling now, and the term "global warming" has been dropped in favor of a new term "climate change."

Today is Easter and it's still cold and windy and yesterday it was snowing where I live. Everybody I've talked to says it's chilly and cold and they are sick to death of winter.

The ice caps on the planets are also frozen back to what they were.

Climate change is caused by the waxing and waning of the sun. The sun has been in a waning phase for a few years now, no sunspots. It will flare up again and it's predicted it will get really hot.

If getting rid of our SUVs is going to get the sun to stop waxing and waning, I will eat my sneakers.

Just more pseudoscience, superstition, alchemy, and pure lies, magick, and hokum from our good friends, the Freemasons and Luciferians at NASA.

posted on Apr, 12 2009 @ 08:35 PM
i am not sure where you are going with this based on your comments (the op).

are you showing us this as evidence of the shame that you see CC as? or what?

a little background research in the scientist in question quickly diminished the article posted as any form of evidence to counter the current prevailing understanding of ACC.

I would suggest you read both: #1 and #2

they both demonstrate how dr shindell is a proponent of ACC.

while the article you posted talks about a link between the reduction of certain pollutants playing a roll in ACC he is in now way saying the other 'factors' that have been identified are now considered harmless. indeed, in the second link i posted he talks about how we have yet to develop a truly sound understanding of this phenomenon to adequately counter it.

new topics

top topics

log in