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.

 

Revealed: the secret evidence of global warming Bush tried to hide

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 05:55 PM
link   
Do not listen to a word the government tells you, the data is probably fake and the earth changes all the time due to solar cycles.




posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by fapython
Well there are a few russian scientists who say that all the planets in our solar system are heating up, not )ust ours. So not really global warming, but a solar cycle


Why do people like you insist on injecting logic and reason in the Global Warming debate. You do nothing to further the agenda. Stop it already!



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 06:24 PM
link   
What they don't tell you is how it's a half truth, or not the whole truth. yes, polar ice caps are retreating in the north but the south is actually increasing.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 06:38 PM
link   
wether it is a solar cycle for just earth, no one can discount the fact that man has created too much pollution and it is not helping the overall picture...



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Souljah
 


Haven't "polar ice sheets" always retreated in summer? Effects on wildlife? You mean such as polar bear populations declining from over 20,000 to the 1950's level of around 5,000? We must have interfered allowing them to grow beyond their naturally sustainable population level. If we lose 15,000 or so polar bears they will return to their previously sustainable level. Maybe they should be culled?

All seriousness aside, any chance to kick Bush in the nads right? Laura and the twins would probably like a crack at this point. Fluctuations have been going on and science has traced them. The data is looked at from the viewpoint of whatever criminals are in charge. The data is fudged. That's what they're paid to do. If nine live and one dies we hear one died. When the other gang gets in we hear nine lived and the one that died committed suicide.

Obama supporters support Obama and kick Bush in the nads. That's what they do. Those independent of either party have had to put up with the money stealing gymnastics of both parties while trying to earn an honest living. That's all coming to a head and there is an exodus from both parties swelling the numbers of independents.



In "A Streetcar Named Desire," character Blanche DuBois depended on the kindness of strangers. In the newly released film, "An Inconvenient Truth," Al Gore depends on their forgetfulness.

Just 10 years ago, Gore told the Democratic National Convention that after his sister Nancy's needless death in 1984 from lung cancer, he committed himself "heart and soul into the cause of protecting our children from the dangers of smoking." In his new film, Gore again dredges up his sister's death and how it led his once tobacco-growing family to turn away from tobacco.

After the DNC speech, reporters with memories intervened. America learned that contrary to his rhetoric, in 1988 Gore campaigned as a tobacco farmer who told his brethren that "all of my life," I hoed it, chopped it, shredded it, "put it in the barn and stripped it and sold it." The year his sister died, Gore helped the industry by fighting efforts to put the words "death" and "addiction" on cigarette-warning labels. - Debra Saunders


The entire article:

Al Gore's Convenient Fiction

How needless was sister Nancy's death? It helped brother Al make money from two diametrically opposed positions. They all do it but I prefer not over my dead body.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by A52FWY
What's the point of cap and trade if India and China don't play? They're not stupid, and that's where the jobs are going. Cap and trade is a joke.


Bingo! That's the scam right there. China has more and more coal fired power plants eating up what little reduction in carbon emissions is occurring or can possibly ever occur. That doesn't excuse pollution by any means and CO2 is not pollution but it indicates the carbon tax is pissing in the wind. Oh and making the rich richer. There is always that. Damn, I almost forgot!



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 07:39 PM
link   
This picture is clearly manipulated:


The ice may sure have melted, but this image is not real for some reason, just wanted to point that out.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 09:13 PM
link   
The issue of global warming is enormously complex. Very few of us have the science to adequately understand what it is, what it means, what causes it, and what we can do about it.

Most of us don't even have the science to adequately understand whether it's actually happening or not. Instead of relying on data and analyzing it, we rely on "experts" to translate for us. That is always a problem, because these "experts" can have hidden agenda. They may work for industry, big business, the oil companies, the military, and want to minimize the existence of importance of global warming. They may be associated with any number of green organizations and want to exaggerate the importance. Scientists working for the US government were gagged, forbidden to discuss the facts as the Bush Administration set about rearranging reality to suit its short-sighted goals.

Even something as seemingly obvious as ice melts don't reliably tell the story. There have always been year-to-year variations of temperatures, ice accumulations, El Ninos, La Ninas, hurricanes, and other weather fluctuations. These variations can easily swamp the slight, but steady changes that may be happening. In one year - in even just a few decades - such slight changes are almost undetectable. Over longer periods of time they become noticeable. Ice may melt alarmingly in some places, while piling up elsewhere. We can't tell, just by looking at the ice.

We can't tell, just by looking at any single data stream. It needs to be tied together, and really we barely have the technology to make sense of all the data. A huge amount of data is based on best approximations or even guesswork, hypothetical situations that aren't confirmed, assumptions that are later invalidated by new discoveries. We are constantly discovering systems that either work synergistically with such things as greenhouse gases, or which tend to diminish their effect. We don't know how all these various systems interact with each other to affect the weather.

So you'll see photos of ice melts, or posts about record low temperatures in the US, and conclude that global warming is the real deal or a crock. But it's impossible to make any sort of reliable claim on the basis of such isolated data.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah

Revealed: the secret evidence of global warming Bush tried to hide


www.guardian.co.uk

Photos from US spy satellites declassified by the Obama White House provide the first graphic images of how the polar ice sheets are retreating in the summer. The effects on the world's weather, environments and wildlife could be devastating.
(visit the link for the full news article)




Oh wow, so POTUS Obama somehow found yet another avenue from which he could yet again "Blame Bush" for "Hiding something from the American People", and at the same time make himself appear as the "Transparent" leader which he campaigned himself to be.

BTW, the lady who writes this article is a well established "Greeny", and quite ignorant to boot.



posted on Jul, 26 2009 @ 10:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by chiron613
The issue of global warming is enormously complex. Very few of us have the science to adequately understand what it is, what it means, what causes it, and what we can do about it.


Therein lies the problem, in that not only do some have a false perception of Science (Especially those who claim that since AGW Realists have so many differing theories, that they MUST be wrong, as the IPCC and AGW Supporters are allegedly in consensus with their concepts), but so much spoon fed, over politicized garbage simply shovels itself onto the masses, in the hope and expectation that a mob type popularity will swamp any doubts, and or opposition.

I actually studied the reports of one of the original Arctic Climate Researchers, through the University of Wisconsin, and he had been traversing the Arctic during the days of the Cold War. He truly braved the elements, and quite literally risked his life in conducting his studies of Ice Coverage, Climatology, and so forth. The great shame came about in that his research is the basis for the AGW/"Polar Ice Caps are Disappearing" crowd, yet, his anger resides in the fact that they only cherry-picked from the totality of his entire career's worth of Exploration and Research. The Net-outcome of his Research, in other words, his Conclusive Summary, displayed the fact that the Temperatures, Ice Coverage, and Precipitation vary VASTLY from DAY TO DAY over the entirety of the Arctic. He even stated in a frank manner, that any one specific location on the Arctic can experience Temperature changes of upwards of 40 Degrees Fahrenheit in any 24 Hour Period. For example, one day a location might register an Air Temperature of -40 Degrees Fahrenheit (Below Zero), the next day however it could be between 0 to 10 Degrees Fahrenheit ABOVE Zero in the very same spot. He also made a point of the constant Ice movement, which creates an ever changing landscape, and he also failed to notice any "Changes" outside of Periodic Cycles.


On another note, these Satellite images fail to deploy the resolution which is required in order to see the broken Ice Packs. The NSIDC Satellite images from a year ago for instance, show an entirely open spanse of Arctic Ocean between the continuous Ice Sheet, and the Barrow Coast of Alaska. However, if you look at Photographs taken from Barrow Beach at the same time, you notice Broken Icebergs completely inundating the waters for as distant as the eyes can see. The Satellite Images however, fail to display any of this.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 12:41 AM
link   
The Guardian love to push the man made climate change theory, they are beyond biased on the subject and their writers won't even fathom that the warming cycle could be natural. The newspaper regularly attacks man made global warming deniers and loves to push propaganda to suit their own agenda.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 02:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


I agree I believe that the anti-global warming movement is really to stop any lobbying which attempts to get industry to reduce pollutants.


Pollutants cause untold amounts of damage to people and the places we live. I could care less about the global warming caused by pollutants, but I want them to STOP!

Or at least be reduced greatly.

The anti-global warming movement is really a pro-pollution movement.


Oh it is is it? That is quite a CONSPIRACY you are alleging, you got any proof ? Huh?



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 03:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by earlywatcher
there is no question that this planet's weather fluctuates.
[edit on 26-7-2009 by earlywatcher]


Umm... we are not discussing the weather. If you want to know about that look out your window or turn on the weather channel.

We are talking about climate. Get it?



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 03:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by GorehoundLarry


It's a solar issue, for crying out loud.


Yes, it is, but not because of 'solar variation', because of 'solar energy entrapment'.



Wasn't there evidence that proved the opposite of Global Warming but they wanted it to cover it up?


No, there wasn't.

[edit on 27/7/2009 by rnaa]



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 04:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by earlywatcher
reply to post by ElectricUniverse
 


your post brings a question to my mind. i've read that CO2 from organic life is a closed cycle. we just recycle in and out. it's only the carbon we bring out that was stored in the earth, like coal and oil, and put it back in the air that's a problem. so the entire green movement is based on carbon. is there anything in there about heavy metals? or other chemicals put into the air or water by industry? or is it just CO2?


Life on earth has been 'conditioning' the planetary environment since it began 500 million years ago. It has changed the atmosphere from methane dominated to a nitrogen and oxygen dominated one. And in the process it has 'sequestered' the excess carbon in vegetation, and in deposits of coal, petroleum, and natural gas. 500 million years of evolutionary change.

Mankind is in the process of 'un-sequestering' that carbon in less than 500 years and putting it back into the atmosphere as CO2 and methane.

In 1750 atmospheric methane was 700 parts per billion and in 1998 was 1745ppb. In the same time frame CO2 rose from 278 to 365 parts per million. The net effect of the increase in methane is about one third the effect of the rise in CO2 even though the percentage difference was much greater.

See this diagram for systems that contribute to both warming and cooling and the sum effect of human activity.

The fundamental reason that the main focus is on CO2 is because of the wavelengths it blocks. Water vapor and Methane and CO2 are indeed all green house gases. But all of them block or transmit light energy at different wavelengths (that is, they all have their own sets of wavelengths, but the sets may overlap in places).

It happens that there is already enough water vapor in the atmosphere to completely block energy at the wavelengths it blocks. Adding more water vapor is not going to make any difference to the green house effect caused by water vapor. Think about painting a window. One coat may let light through, even two coats. But by the third coat there won't be much if any light getting through, so adding a fourth, fifth, sixth won't make any difference. Likewise, the methane wavelengths are pretty well saturated too.

CO2 is the major control mechanism that the planet has to manage its temperature, and yes the planetary history shows variations in atmospheric CO2 and the resultant climate changes. But the timescales of planetary climate variations are measured in 10's of thousands of years if not 100's of thousands. We are dumping 500 millions years worth of carbon sequestering back into the atmosphere in less than 500 years.

The wavelengths that CO2 blocks are not saturated.yet. But as that 500 million years worth of carbon is blown into the atmosphere, it is painting more and more layers onto that window. And each layer reduces the amount of energy that is radiated back into space, causing a net increase on the temperature of the planet.

That is why the focus is on CO2 and less on other greenhouse gasses.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 04:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChemBreather
Not man made, and it is only a result of the cycle of all things.
It is a money proffeting scam, look at this clip !!



The Earth is warming, but NOT by MAN ..


He admitted that we have raised the temprature by "one tenth of a degree"
... that is still us raising the temprature... hence GLOBAL WARMING! Maybe not alarming but still global warming.

Why is everyone so anti green... living green isn't a bad thing, we shouldn't just be thinking about CO2. Water pollution forestry etc. has a massive impact on the environment.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 04:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by TrappedSoul
This picture is clearly manipulated:


The ice may sure have melted, but this image is not real for some reason, just wanted to point that out.


Definitely been manipulated...




posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 04:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hemisphere
reply to post by Souljah
 


The entire article:

Al Gore's Convenient Fiction

How needless was sister Nancy's death? It helped brother Al make money from two diametrically opposed positions. They all do it but I prefer not over my dead body.


Your claims of hypocrisy by Gore over Tobacco are just silly and mean spirited. He has never said that his sister's death lead him to immediately reject tobacco. He has said it was an issue that he struggled with for years.

He made a speech in 1988 that he had been involved in the tobacco industry all his life. Nothing wrong with that, he had been involved. What is hypocritical for him to show regret for that involvement in 1996?

Your agenda is showing.
He stopped taking donations from the tobacco industry in 1990.



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 05:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
Pollutants cause untold amounts of damage to people and the places we live. I could care less about the global warming caused by pollutants, but I want them to STOP!

You want them to STOP!??

Then you better stop breathing.


Any science or theory which labels the natural breathing process of humans as a pollutant, the exhalation of carbon dioxide, is totally ludicrous and should be ridiculed. Only someone with a sinister and devious plan or outlook could even conceive of such a laughable idea.
Double thumbs down for such stupidity!



posted on Jul, 27 2009 @ 06:11 AM
link   
OK for all those who did not understand the point of this article and the picture, which speaks more then thousand words. Firstly, if you would have read the text under the photo, you would have noticed that these are photos both taken in summer; one in the summer of 2006 and the other in the summer of 2007. All those who claim, that the photos have been digitally manipulated - this is not the only case of large quantities of ice being melted. Maybe you should drive up to Alaska and check it out for yourself - it is July and if the photo has been manipulated, there should be plenty of ice left! But that is not the case here. The problem is with global weather and the effects on everybody living here and you can not deny that the weather conditions in last ten years have not changed. And yes there are politicians who shall always get their prestige and more money and power by hanging on to issues like this (Al Gore) and yes there are politicians who shall try not to tell us certain facts about global warming. Yet it is still happening. And us, arguing about who is guilty for that, is just a waste of time...



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join