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.

 

Greenpeace Leader Admits They Lied About Arctic Ice Melt

page: 2
27
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 05:12 AM
link   
reply to post by halfmanhalfamazing
 




Greener??? With deforistation and developement??? Really???


Yes, actually .. warmer temps alone are being blamed for it .. though Co2 is naturally something plants need, the saturation levels before "global warming" are enough to provide for the recent boom in the Biosphere. Even with deforestation the Biosphere is blooming.

It should also be pointed out that young trees process twice as much Co2 and thus produce more oxygen than older trees. When an old forest is destroyed and trees planted in it's place the young forest crop will produce more oxygen, processing more Co2 than the older forest.

The forest that takes the most Co2 out of the air and produces the most Oxygen is the Boreal Forest, the largest forest in the World.. believe it or not, not the rainforests. Specifically in the Arctic Circle, also into Canada and across Siberia.. Luckily these forest have not been deforested much, not idle for farming or living for that matter..




posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 05:43 AM
link   
the original greenpeace press release states

Bad news is coming from other sources as well. A recent NASA study has shown that the ice cap is not only getting smaller, it’s getting thinner and younger. Sea ice has dramatically thinned between 2004 and 2008. Old ice (over 2 years old) takes longer to melt, and is also much harder to replace. As permanent ice decreases, we are looking at ice-free summers in the Arctic as early as 2030.


this seems to be based on a NASA press release that states that the multi-year sea ice has halved in the last five years thich greenpeace seem to have extrapolated in a crude, heavy handed fashion.

In 2003, 62 percent of the Arctic's total ice volume was stored in multi-year ice, with 38 percent stored in first-year seasonal ice. By 2008, 68 percent of the total ice volume was first-year ice, with 32 percent multi-year.


so, the inaccuracy here seems to be that greenpeace didn't state that there would be summers free of sea ice. big freaking deal, if there is no sea ice, most people would say that it's an "ice free summer". from the way the BBC reporter was speaking, i assume he knew what green peace meant and just wanted to get a good oppositional interview sound bite.

lazy assed journalism at its best.

IMHO, all that's happening in this debate is that spin and anti spin are being spun by all and sundry to create a level of ignorance that is just mind boggling. all the sensationally made claims being debunked in sensational ways makes for the exponential growth of ignorance.

this is just a sickening level of misinformation based on the fact that the sea ice is thinning. for whatever reason, it is thinning.

[edit on 21/8/09 by pieman]



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 07:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by king9072

Originally posted by halfmanhalfamazing
This interview does not state anything...

We are contributing to global warming.

The facts speak for themselves...

Are we looking for things to make us feel okay about littering and what we are doing to the environment??



There's a vast difference between pollution and the "global warming" debate, to fail to differentiate between the two illustrates your lack of knowledge.




No, the anti-global warming forces in the lobby groups are fighting this because all of the measures taken to combat it (whether real or not) are anti-pollution measures.

That's the real battle from the right... they want the freedom to pollute our world until there is nothing left.



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 07:47 AM
link   
reply to post by HunkaHunka
 


Perhaps the bills real aim IS to combat pollution (talking about Cap And Trade I assume).. but really all it outlines is corporate taxing and the creation of a new commodity.

Obama is, from my observations of the election, a Green politician more or less. I imagine once he's done dicking around with the economy and the health care issue he will eventually do something positive for the environment, which I would greatly welcome.

As long as it wasn't riddled with corporate sponsored ideas like taxing carbon production ..

And you're right, Republicans generally don't give a damn about the environment.. Dunno why.



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 08:41 AM
link   
Wow! now I have heard everything. lol.

Propaganda never stops amazing me.

When people want something so badly to happen they will stop at nothing to attain their agenda.

Religion, Politics, etc......they all eventually start to manipulate the masses.



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Realtruth
Wow! now I have heard everything. lol.

Propaganda never stops amazing me.

When people want something so badly to happen they will stop at nothing to attain their agenda.

Religion, Politics, etc......they all eventually start to manipulate the masses.


It's people... all of us attempt to manipulate our environment to fit our world view.

It's been that way since the dawn of time. There is no "eventually" about it. It happens at birth.



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 08:57 AM
link   
reply to post by halfmanhalfamazing
 


You do know that deforestation, at least in the U.S., is a myth, right? Every tree they cut down they replant. They have massive tree farms that they maintain just like anything else that's done in the U.S.

Surely you've seen tiny tree farms in the form of Christmas Tree Farms right?

www.christmas-tree.com...

There's nothing different about this than what loggers do in the U.S. I imagine they do the same in Canada.

Really, the entire thing is a farce. There is no evidence to support for or against the existence of man made global warming. Is the planet getting warmer? Sure. Is it man made? Nobody can say. The planet has been warm before. To assume that it wouldn't ever go back that way is just like assuming anything else related to the matter.

What we do know, though, is that people like Al Gore profit tremendously from this movement through green credit actions. And we also know that he uses more than 20 times as much electricity as the national average. And we also know that he pays carbon credits to offset this. And we also know that he owns the carbon credit company that he pays through.

We also know about England's £38m carbon credit fraud.

From that, we can draw conclusions about the situation.



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 09:21 AM
link   
Throughout history episodic eruptions of mass manias have swept societies. These outbreaks embody the dissatisfactions, fears and hopes of their times while offering a shining path to a bright new future. They are characterised by a millenarian nature, wherein threat of punishment for past sins is accompanied by promise of salvation through a new faith.

... Global Warming is the mania of our times. While there is good scientific evidence that atmospheric carbon dioxide is increasing from the burning of fossil fuels, and that carbon dioxide does indeed absorb infa-red heat radiation of certain frequencies, it is purely speculation that this will cause a climate catastrophe.

... In addition to the true believers, GW has attracted a large contingent of self-interested fellow travellers. Politicians, bureaucrats, political activists and manifold financial interest have perceived advantages to be gained from climbing aboard the GW bandwagon. Large vested interests are now involved, and there is great pressure to lock in emission controls and subsidies before popular support weakens.
~ WALTER STARCK



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 09:29 AM
link   
The problem isnt that the earth is warming as mentioned earlier it is a natural process that has been going on and off for eons. THEreal problem is that the warming is now man assisted ie what would have taken thousands of years is now being done in centuries. The problem is adaption. If you warm the Earth too quickly a lot of plant and animal species may not adapt quickly enough and will diie out, lessening the biodeversity to an alrready low extent.
Where it is true trees cut down in the west are replanted but the trees planted are soft wood trees and very little hardwood because hardwood will take centuries to mature....So planting an large area with softwood trees will lessen the biodeversity in that are removing aniimals and plants that need hardwood to survive.
The amazon rainforest contributes a lot to the production of oxygen to the atmosphere and yet these forests sre being burned so we human can graze cattle...
So to those who say global warming isnt a problem or its underrated you really need to open your eyes and look at everything humankind is doing to this planet..
In the end we have only one planet and if we continue to rape this planet it will no longer be able to support us in the long run.
We are already in what is called an ecological debt where we consume more resources then we actualy put back in...



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 10:00 AM
link   
reply to post by semperfortis
 

so we should just continue this unrestrained model of growth without fear of any consequences
we wont worry about the pollution and disease or mental well being sad thing is the people who defend the actions of the filthy rich



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 10:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheAssociate

Greenpeace Leader Admits They Lied About Arctic Ice Melt





Great! You busted them! Now I'd like to start a thread titled...

TheAssociate Admits They Lied About Greenpeace and non-existence of The Artic Ice Melt!!

Since all standards of truth and credibility seem to have been thrown out the window for the sake of propaganda and spin to serve a given position in a percieved culture war.

I plan to fill my OP with misleading, very liberal, paraphrasing rather than using TheAssociates own words, I also plan to strip certain statements of his of any context to misrepresent the truth.

Wow ...I like these spin pieces in the culture wars where honesty and truth don't matter.

He says that he (personally) does not believe the entirety of Artic Ice would dissapear by the date 2030.

He doesn't say that a the press release which said 2030 was a lie, he just says he doesn't think that is accurate. He is being truthful about his opinion.

AND...HE is not GREENPEACE.
Greenpeace is a huge organization...so to say since he doesn't think a given date was accurate...
does not equate to Greeanpeace "admitting they lied".

AND your thread title infers that he is admitting that there is not Artic Ice Melt occuring....what he admits is that the date 2030 is not accurate in his opinion.

This does not translate to "THEY LIED"

Keep on smacking that wedge though! Don't worry about accuracy or facts.

[edit on 21-8-2009 by maybereal11]

[edit on 21-8-2009 by maybereal11]



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 10:38 AM
link   
Planet Earth has been around for 1000 times longer than mankind has walked on its surface. To think that we are somehow destroying this ball of dirt is just assinine. Humanity is a minor rash on a rather large entity and once it is done scratching, it will cure itself. To think that we can somehow destroy her through our meager efforts and spoiled child antics is like saying we could burn out the Sun with a hydrogen bomb.

The only thing that man does is make the life of man more difficult. Earth is only inconvenieced a bit.



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by wheresthetruth
The only thing that man does is make the life of man more difficult.


go tell that to a dodo!!
the earth may well be around 1000 times longer than us but it's all the innocent life we're destroying that bothers me.



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 10:54 AM
link   
reply to post by TheAssociate
 


Gee...I might actually believe this post, except for the fact that hundreds of other scientists have researched this and found the melting of the ice to be accurate.

Sorry, even though Greenpeace may have exaggerated...there are many other scientists who have not.

This post says nothing.



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Credge
reply to post by halfmanhalfamazing
 


You do know that deforestation, at least in the U.S., is a myth, right? Every tree they cut down they replant. They have massive tree farms that they maintain just like anything else that's done in the U.S.

Surely you've seen tiny tree farms in the form of Christmas Tree Farms right?

www.christmas-tree.com...

There's nothing different about this than what loggers do in the U.S. I imagine they do the same in Canada.

Really, the entire thing is a farce. There is no evidence to support for or against the existence of man made global warming. Is the planet getting warmer? Sure. Is it man made? Nobody can say. The planet has been warm before. To assume that it wouldn't ever go back that way is just like assuming anything else related to the matter.

What we do know, though, is that people like Al Gore profit tremendously from this movement through green credit actions. And we also know that he uses more than 20 times as much electricity as the national average. And we also know that he pays carbon credits to offset this. And we also know that he owns the carbon credit company that he pays through.

We also know about England's £38m carbon credit fraud.

From that, we can draw conclusions about the situation.


Well you have certain points that are correct concerning the global warming movement and its profitability. But, I can easily look out the window and compare the weather of today to 10 years ago. Global warming is real. If you really believe that what we are doing to the planet has no effect, then, you are in denial.



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 11:10 AM
link   
Sheesh. Like some others have said, what was said in the initial press release was that there might be ice-free summers. Never more than that was claimed.

To understand how this ice-free sea situation can come to be true, it comes down to the ice glaciers. These are thick, slabs of ice that are on top of the water themselves. They are connected to ice that has ground below it. But, these glacier are breaking off, and once they break off, they travel away from the pole and begin to melt.

Now, if you could be riding on that glacier of ice as it floats away, and you look behind you, you will see a large expanse of sea that is no longer covered in ice. Ice-free, if you will. This will lead to a relatively fast chain reaction, where, because that first berg is not there, the material that used to be attached and protected, it's no longer protected, so it will start the whole process over until it breaks off, too.

And sure, some of these will reform during the next fall and winter (which is why they have to say ice-free summer and not ice-free), but they will be thin and fragile. Ultimately this will lead to another summer of ice-free seas. It's like the saying about taking 1 step forward and 2 steps back. But it is not like the ice is going to retreat immediately to the point where you can walk on solid ground at the poles.

And the south pole is an even more interesting problem. Not only are they losing very large ice floes, but these pieces are floating up into the cape of good hope, which threatens a lot of seafaring ships going through the shipping lanes.

While I am not claiming that Greenpeace is right or wrong in their opinion, I do think they deserve the chance to be accurately portrayed. I would say the same thing in a case where the government or other "official" people were vilified.



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 11:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gamma MO
... Global Warming is the mania of our times. While there is good scientific evidence that atmospheric carbon dioxide is increasing from the burning of fossil fuels, and that carbon dioxide does indeed absorb infa-red heat radiation of certain frequencies, it is purely speculation that this will cause a climate catastrophe.


You gotta be kidding... There is plenty of calculations to support that. Just google it, buddy.

There is plenty of material out there that you ignore.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 11:36 AM
link   
All this climate change is just a scam. The earth is going through a Normal cycle.

www.scotese.com...
data.giss.nasa.gov...
www.museum.state.il.us...
pubs.usgs.gov/gip/ice_age/ice_age.pdf
DMNS-Ice Age in Depth


Here is a link to a green peace site saying that the SEA ice is melting/
weblog.greenpeace.org...



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Great find!
Worth a star and flag too route out these scum.

Can we get back to good and bad and easy to figure out which one is what.



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 11:48 AM
link   
I've been reading through these posts and it amuses me. It seems to be that CO2 emissions are the single minded focus of all environmentalists. Yet even though as other members have stated, there is a growing problem with pollution in our world; a general lack of commitment towards recycling and what not. Do you realize how much sewage is dumped into the oceans every day? Think about the amount of cities that line the coasts of the oceans, who dump their filth, untreated, into the ocean. It has been postulated that such pollution is raising the temperature of the ocean. But this is just ONE of the many theories for global warming, yet I see little media coverage on this topic, or others.

We as humans are generally ignorant, it is impossible for us to fathom all things at one time. Even I'm ignorant, but together we can remove this viel of ignorance. To do this we must keep an open mind, and policy on climate change. I think it is ignorant of a vast majority of people to suggest that our highly complex ecosystem is controlled soley by CO2 emissions. This is the typical ignorance that is expressed in places like Austrailia, where to deal with one problem, we introduce another problem. But Austrailia is just a microcosm of what we as a race accomplish.

It is also unfortunate that our society operates on a dense beaurocracy. It seems to pass laws and to make change, we require a radicle stimulation. This stimulation comes in the way of fear tactics. We see it in many forms, may they be 9/11 , Katrina, swine flu, or economic collapse. The unfortuante matter is that if people are complacent, things won't change. So in order to create change within a system, someone has to provoke it. This is exactly what Greenpeace does, for better or for worse. But unfortunatley, this is due to societies general lack of interest. Maybe as time proceeds, we will see the furthering of peoples interaction within their community. For now, all I see is people bickering on an inconsequential website, discussing topics they have little or no experience with. We are all ignorant ladies and gentleman, get involved in your community if you want change. Have a good day.



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join