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.

 

Climate Change Killing 300,000 per year

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 30 2009 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by peacejet
 


It's a good list, PJ. Good job. Drought and water level rise, plus the diminishment of many species, an increase in storm strength, are right up there with the big issues. Although we could relate even more things to it, linking to our health depending on if you count pollution as part of climate change.

Don't let people talk down to you, by the way. Good job.

[edit on 5/30/2009 by ravenshadow13]




posted on May, 30 2009 @ 08:54 PM
link   
reply to post by ravenshadow13
 


Thanks Raven, atleast you understand the severity of global warming and the consequences.



posted on May, 30 2009 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANNED
my biggest problem with more hurricanes being caused by global warming is nothing support that.

I fact just the opposite higher global temperatures will cause more frequent El Nino weather patterns.



Some scientists believe that the increased intensity and frequency—now every two to three years—of El Niño and La Niña events in recent decades is due to warmer ocean temperatures resulting from global warming. In a 1998 report, scientists from NOAA explained that higher global temperatures might be increasing evaporation from land and adding moisture to the air, thus intensifying the storms and floods associated with El Niño.


Link




posted on May, 30 2009 @ 09:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Ketzer22
 

Here's a perfect opportunity to 'deconstruct' some propaganda.

Here's how -

300,000 per year out of 7,000,000,000 ( not exactly, but close enough ) is 4 per 100,000 ... per year ...

This story is garbage ... these numbers are 'down in the noise' ...

But, since most people have about a 5th-grade technical literacy, they have no way to 'process' this information ...

Read it and weep !



posted on May, 30 2009 @ 10:37 PM
link   
reply to post by peacejet
 



Originally posted by peacejet
reply to post by ravenshadow13
 


Thanks Raven, atleast you understand the severity of global warming and the consequences.


What you are actually saying is "atleast you understand the hype surrounding severity of global warming and the consequences.
"

What serious consequences are you referencing? I am yet to see any peer-reviewed reports by respected scientists showing an increase in serious weather events due to AGW.

Take sea level rise for instance. AGW alarmists will have you believe that many people face imminent threat due to AGW.
I have been awaiting a reply from Raven (not trying to attack you or anything, just intrested to see what you think) on this thread regarding this very subject.
Raven posted these links:
www.safecom.org.au...
kauaian.net...
These islands are sinking, yet AGW is being blamed for the problem of sea level rise. These are unfounded claims being used to try to exagerate the problems associated with climate change. As you can see here and here, there is no indication that the sea has risen any more rapidly due to AGW. Unless you want to trust the UN's IPCC...



A noted expert in sea level change has accused UN's IPCC panel of falsifying and destroying data (PDF) to support the panel's official conclusion of a rising sea level trend. The accusations include surreptitious substitution of datasets, selective use of data, presenting computer model simulations as physical data, and even the destruction of physical markers which fail to demonstrate sea level rise.

The expert, Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner, also raps the IPCC for their selection of 22 authors of their most recent report on sea level rise (SLR), none of which were sea level specialists. According to Mörner, the authors were chosen to "arrive at a predetermined conclusion" of global warming-induced disaster.

Source

In fact, the majority of "catastrophic warming" scare publications are just that. Publications intended to scare you into accepting the TINA theory. There Is No Alternative. The UN have been proposing to introduce a global pollution tax (carbon tax) for over 15 years to fund reform of the UN, not to discourage pollution. You can see evidence of this at this thread.

Don't get me wrong, I know that we are causing damage to our planet, but "anthropogenic global warming" is hyped WAY beyond what the evidence suggests. Global warming is being used to funnel more money into fewer people, and gaining more control of you and me.

As you can see by the OP article, it is yet another scare publication based on little to no evidence, claiming exteme consequences due to AGW.
If you are really interested in our environment, it would pay to look past the hype, to see the real problems facing us, and not be fooled by profiteers.



posted on May, 30 2009 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Curious and Concerned
 


There is a misunderstanding here. What she is telling(in the thread you linked) is that the islands are sinking and only the islanders and those facing dangers are worrying, and those safe from the danger do not care about what ever happens to those people. Thats all.


And regarding the sea level rise, it wont all happen in a day, it is occuring at a rate which is steadily increasing.

EPA report

[edit on May 30th, 2009 by peacejet]



posted on May, 30 2009 @ 10:50 PM
link   
reply to post by peacejet
 


I've started maybe three climate change related threads in the past few weeks and each of them was shot down at least once by someone saying that climate change is a farce.

It's a battle I've stopped fighting. I put forth evidence that I know is true when I feel that it is appropriate and I just continue my own studies and education so that our planet does not fall to ecological ruin.



posted on May, 30 2009 @ 10:52 PM
link   
reply to post by ravenshadow13
 


Yes, raven, you are correct. People wont believe this unless it affects them. They dont care if others are affected by this.



posted on May, 30 2009 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by peacejet
 


I'm a little confused as to what you were trying to prove with that link? It showed no discernible facts regarding an increase in sea level rise due to AGW. It just posed 'scary' examples of what could occur due to sea level rise.


Originally posted by peacejet
reply to post by Curious and Concerned
 


And regarding the sea level rise, it wont all happen in a day, it is occuring at a rate which is steadily increasing.


Where did you get the infomation to come to this conclusion?



posted on May, 30 2009 @ 11:22 PM
link   
reply to post by ravenshadow13
 



Originally posted by ravenshadow13
reply to post by peacejet
 


I've started maybe three climate change related threads in the past few weeks and each of them was shot down at least once by someone saying that climate change is a farce.

It's a battle I've stopped fighting. I put forth evidence that I know is true when I feel that it is appropriate and I just continue my own studies and education so that our planet does not fall to ecological ruin.


They weren't "shot down". Someone just posted evidence which showed that climate change is a farce. If you have evidence that AGW actually is as important as profiteers make it out to be, then please post it. It is a battle worth fighting if it were actually true, but based on current evidence, it is not worth the impacts that carbon taxing will have.

You don't have to agree with AGW alarmists to be concerned about our environment. Did you even look into the info I posted?


[edit on 30-5-2009 by Curious and Concerned]



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Curious and Concerned
 


I did. Have you looked at any of the info we've posted?
So we're at a standstill.

You think you're right. I think I'm right, and that PJ is right. It doesn't matter in the long run to you. It matters to me. And worse comes to worse, I'm playing it safe.

I'm not making money off of this. My professors aren't really. It costs more money to save the planet than to ruin it.

If you don't want to pay more money for something you think isn't happening, that's fine. But don't judge others who want to act on what they feel is an important issue.

[edit on 5/31/2009 by ravenshadow13]



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 12:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Curious and Concerned
 


Will you guys ever post data disproving global warming instead of simply denying it and saying that it is a opportunity for the government to make more tax money? I am fed up of hearing this all the time in the threads.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 12:37 AM
link   
reply to post by ravenshadow13
 


Yes I have looked at the articles you and PJ have posted. And I've posted evidence showing where they have erred. Have you done the same?

It's not about who is right or wrong. It's about the evidence at hand, and what to make of it. There is an extremely large amount of evidence, showing that alarmists information is flawed, and often intentionally done so to push an agenda. If you want actual facts and information, as opposed to scare mongering fiction, try some of these threads.
Peer Reviewed Scientific Research That Refutes Anbthropogenic Global Warming and More.
1st Co Chair of IPCC admits politics rules not science
AGW Smoking Gun? NYT gets AGW marketing strategy memo: Stop using 'global warming'!
NWO to be funded by Climate Change!

There is a start.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 12:41 AM
link   
reply to post by peacejet
 


Will you guys ever post data proving Global Warming?

I could write a paper saying that the sky is actually green and pay enough "credible" scientist to peer review my paper and confirm it.

What you are trying to say about Islands sinking is something that has happened on earth since the earth first existed. Islands sink and new ones form all the time it is a natural cycle. It in no way proves Global Warming. There is nothing anybody can do about it either.

Edit - changed probes to proves

[edit on 31-5-2009 by Hastobemoretolife]



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 12:48 AM
link   



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 01:00 AM
link   
reply to post by peacejet
 


Here is my link.

wattsupwiththat.com...

We can do this all day. Post links back and forth. The fact is if the "science" was settled then every scientist on the planet would be trying to find ways to to solve the problem.

I'm not going to get into a huge long debate about it.

The fact is the AGW alarmist stifle actual debate about the subject and every time they debate the "deniers" the alarmist always lose. I guess if I always lost my position I would stifle debate too.

To probe AGW you have to provide a constant and there is nothing constant about the climate. Until they can build a model in a lab of earth with all variables then AGW will never be proven or disproved.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by ravenshadow13
reply to post by Curious and Concerned
 

If you don't want to pay more money for something you think isn't happening, that's fine. But don't judge others who want to act on what they feel is an important issue.


The problem is, I won't have a choice! In a few months, the worlds leaders will be meeting at Copenhagen, around Christmas, to discuss the new 'kyoto' treaty. The UN will hope to have the world sign up to compulsory carbon emissions cuts, and agree to compulsory new taxes in the name of climate change.

So Yes, EVERYONE will have to pay. And I'm not judging anyone. I've tried my best to post credible sources for everyone to see. Just because my views differ from yours (I'm sure there are plenty of things we do agree on
) does not mean I am judging you or attacking you in any way. If I have come across this way, I apologize, but this is a very important topic, which will have consequences for everyone.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 01:01 AM
link   


In 2006, there were 13,470 fatalities in crashes involving an alcohol-impaired driver (BAC of .08 or higher) – 32 percent of total traffic fatalities for the year.



heart attack: 459,841 deaths in 1998 (NHLBI); 199,154 deaths for AMI reported in USA 1999 (NVSR Sep 2001)





high blood pressure: 16,968 annual deaths from primary hypertension and hypertensive renal disease in 1999 USA (NVSR Sep 2001)



Ischemic heart disease: 529,659 deaths reported in USA 1999 (NVSR Sep 2001



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 01:05 AM
link   


Deaths from Obesity: 300,000 premature deaths associated with obesity annually (CDC)
Death rate extrapolations for USA for Obesity: 300,000 per year, 25,000 per month, 5,769 per week, 821 per day, 34 per hour, 0 per minute, 0 per second. Note: this automatic extrapolation calculation uses the deaths statistic: 300,000 premature deaths associated with obesity annually (CDC)

Deaths information for Obesity: Approximately 280,000 adult deaths in the United States each year are attributable to obesity.9 (Source: excerpt from NIDDK _ Statistics Related to Overweight and Obesity: NIDDK)



Links: www.wrongdiagnosis.com...
www.wrongdiagnosis.com...

At least as many people die from Obesity as global warming supposedly.

There are many more things we should be concerned about.

As a Son from a father who died a painful death of Heart Disease I know me and others will face the same very real threat.

I'm more concerned about that then al gores fear mongering.



posted on May, 31 2009 @ 01:10 AM
link   
reply to post by peacejet
 


That thread only agrees with what I was saying. It shows mainly cases of weather variation, which has been happening for as long as we have records. Yet these have very little to no link to AGW whatsoever, as many posters have pointed out in that thread. Yet another scare publication with no actual evidence.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join