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.

 

More than 50 papers join in front-page leader article on climate change

page: 3
29
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Silcone Synapse

Originally posted by seethelight

Originally posted by Silcone Synapse
Also,check out this post by the Redneck-Its a mathematical look at the issue of "man made" climate change.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

And as far as I know,he does not work for the FSB.


As far as you know an all seeing eye is controlling the white house.... I'll take my chances with science.


Hang on,thats silly.
My Avatar has nothing to do with the topic-I could say that you believe in nothing as you do not have an Avatar,if we are going to go down the "sniping at Avatars" route...

As to the link I provided,All that covers is the numbers...Correct me if I am wrong,but mathematics as I understand it IS science.





It's not silly.

If you were wearing an Al Gore for President shirt I could safely assume you were a Gore supporter.

If you use some silly masonic symbolism in your avatar I can likewise assume you believe in that as well.

First impressions and all of that...

As for the numbers... numbers are used to lie all the time... in fact numbers in and of themselves mean nothing... context and education help individuals make value judgements on data.

Either you believe there's a cabal of scientists following orders from a NWO leader or you believe that while some scientists are idiots are others are even corrupt the majority of them are not conspiring, with the government and the media to enslave you with climate data.



[edit on 7-12-2009 by seethelight]




posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by stargazerman
 


I don't think anyone is saying that climate change does not exist.
What concerns many is the "man made" bit.
The earth warms and cools naturally.
How do we know that what is happening now is no more than part of the natural cycle?
Glaciers have melted and frozen before us humans started our carbon based industries.
Even if your figures are correct over the last few decades that does by no means prove that we are soley responsible for the supposed rise in temperatures.
Nor does it mean that by giving more extorsionate taxes to the corrupt leaders,that will fix the problem.
In fact,the more money we give to governments to sort things out,the more corrupt and self serving they become IMO.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 10:37 AM
link   
reply to post by kiwifoot
 


Oh this has to be a conspiracy, I mean c'mon the news would never never never report on this because it's the top story of the week. And wouldn't the papers report on this IF there were no conspiracy, and man-made global warming was really a catastrophe in the making.

Next it'll be a conspiracy in the back page for sport, oh why why why does the UK sunday paper's have football on the back??!!! I want to see Tennis on the backpage... oh the conspiracy of it all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[edit on 7-12-2009 by john124]



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 10:37 AM
link   
reply to post by oneclickaway
 


Most newspapers and news get there news from centralised points.

This is how its controlled. Look at how the bbc reported on building 7 falling before it happened. How did they know?



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by john124
Oh this has to be a conspiracy, I mean c'mon the news would never never never report on this because it's the top story of the week. Next it'll be a conspiracy in the back page for sport, oh why why why does the UK sunday paper's have football on the back??!!! I want to see Tennis on the backpage... oh the conspiracy of it all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Couple of points here

* It is obviously "news" as it involves the world's leaders gathering together to possibly agree policies that will impact on our lives
* It is odd though, from my own perspective, it is not exactly the main topic of people's conversations, ie, people I listen/chat to in the gym, pub, work etc are not thinking about the world being saved because of Gordon Brown and his chums or prattling on about Copenhagen (granted some of them are talking nonsense about X Factor and such like)
* The media in the UK is largely bland and conformist in reporting the issue



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 10:44 AM
link   
reply to post by blueorder
 



* The media in the UK is largely bland and conformist in reporting the issue


And they aren't conforming here either: There's the Guardian, daily star and I don't recognise any other national papers in the UK, in that list.

All of those who see a conspiracy here are seeing whatever they wish to see. So yeah my original sarcastic post makes even more sense the more I read it.


[edit on 7-12-2009 by john124]



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by john124

And they aren't conforming here either: There's the Guardian, daily star and I don't recognise any other national papers in the UK, in that list.


Not being on that list does not signify non conformance, bought the Times today as I usually do, and it is a conformist analysis/reporting of Copenhagen and the "issues".

I can't think of any major Daily that would represent significant differing views to the pro AGW side of things- the Daily Mail has a few columnists, perphaps the Express (though not sure)



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 10:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by john124

All of those who see a conspiracy here are seeing whatever they wish to see. So yeah my original sarcastic post makes even more sense the more I read it.


[edit on 7-12-2009 by john124]


to be honest, I don't wear a tinfoil hat, but the conspiracists seem more rational than the coincidence theorists



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 10:50 AM
link   
reply to post by blueorder
 



granted some of them are talking nonsense about X Factor and such like


Go buy the daily express, the sun or the daily mail (all more popular papers) and you'll find the usual tabloid trash that people enjoy discussing in the gym.

Where's the Independent and the Times in that list?

56 papers from 45 countries is nothing. How many papers are printed in each country? There must be over 500 papers in those countries, and the evil UK govt. can do is print it in one decent paper and one crap papers!



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 10:52 AM
link   
reply to post by blueorder
 



Not being on that list does not signify non conformance, bought the Times today as I usually do, and it is a conformist analysis/reporting of Copenhagen and the "issues".


What do you expect? For them not to print anything about Copenhagen for it to be non-conformist? It's the news, and it's what they are supposed to print.

[edit on 7-12-2009 by john124]



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by blueorder
 


So it's a coincidence now that the papers report the news. OKAY!!
And it's not even that many papers out of these countries reporting the same exact article. And somehow the other papers are not supposed to talk about Copenhagen otherwise they are conforming to a conspiracy. HAHA!!! Give me a break!

[edit on 7-12-2009 by john124]



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by kiwifoot
 

You think you're tired of it now? Just wait until the Greenland Ice shelf is gone, and hurricanes are stronger, and weather is more unpredictable and crop yields are down, you're really going to be tired of it then.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by john124
reply to post by blueorder
 



Not being on that list does not signify non conformance, bought the Times today as I usually do, and it is a conformist analysis/reporting of Copenhagen and the "issues".


What do you expect? For them not to print anything about Copenhagen for it to be non-conformist? It's the news, and it's what they are supposed to print.

[edit on 7-12-2009 by john124]



No, I already stated it was newsworthy didn't I
I said it was a bland reporting of the issues, some of their stats were quoted from Greenpeace ffs


Most papers follow the establishment line- the chattering classes and polite society may be worrying about Superman Brown saving the world, but most people do not



Maybe it is all one big coincidence, eh chief



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 11:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by kenochs

You think you're tired of it now? Just wait until the Greenland Ice shelf is gone, and hurricanes are stronger, and weather is more unpredictable and crop yields are down, you're really going to be tired of it then.



what a funny post



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Silcone Synapse
reply to post by stargazerman
 


I don't think anyone is saying that climate change does not exist.
What concerns many is the "man made" bit.
The earth warms and cools naturally.
How do we know that what is happening now is no more than part of the natural cycle?
Glaciers have melted and frozen before us humans started our carbon based industries.
Even if your figures are correct over the last few decades that does by no means prove that we are soley responsible for the supposed rise in temperatures.
Nor does it mean that by giving more extorsionate taxes to the corrupt leaders,that will fix the problem.
In fact,the more money we give to governments to sort things out,the more corrupt and self serving they become IMO.


Tons of people are saying that climate change isn't happeneing.

Others are pretending not to say it by saying things like "the sun is causing it". When it's widely known that that's not even close to being a valid point of view....even for sceptics of MMGW.

How do we know it's manmade?

Because the only trends it matches are those based on human activity.

And, because the majority of the thousands of brainiacs studying it agree that it is mostly caused by man.

And because every time someone disputes this they end up being on an oil companies payroll.

And because we have shown that humans can affect the earth (over fishing, pollution, CFCs, etc.).

I wonder if all the people that say humans can't affect the earth believe that if all of man's nukes went off at once, nothing would change.

We can and have and are affecting the planet. The science is there.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 11:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Silcone Synapse
 


No ones saying that humans are 'solely' responsible for climate change.
The IPCC report can be summed up in a simple sentence:
'Scientific evidence points to the probability that human activity is accelerating the rate of a global warming trend.'

Clear and concise I think.
What gets iffy is all the consequences that follow thereof. Will NY be underwater by 2100? Will the intracoastal waterway be a thing of the past. Will the Greenland and Iceland ice sheets disappear? That's way more science 'fictiony' and difficult to predict.

So, the point is, if you think the planet is getting warmer (and it is, no doubt) then the only question you have to ask yourself is, are we contributing to it in any way? For me, the evidence strongly suggests that we are. So, what happens now? ehh, you got me, but like I've said before the mere idea that we are able to influence the environment is cause for alarm.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by kenochs
reply to post by Silcone Synapse
 


No ones saying that humans are 'solely' responsible for climate change.
The IPCC report can be summed up in a simple sentence:
'Scientific evidence points to the probability that human activity is accelerating the rate of a global warming trend.'

Clear and concise I think.
What gets iffy is all the consequences that follow thereof. Will NY be underwater by 2100? Will the intracoastal waterway be a thing of the past. Will the Greenland and Iceland ice sheets disappear? That's way more science 'fictiony' and difficult to predict.

So, the point is, if you think the planet is getting warmer (and it is, no doubt) then the only question you have to ask yourself is, are we contributing to it in any way? For me, the evidence strongly suggests that we are. So, what happens now? ehh, you got me, but like I've said before the mere idea that we are able to influence the environment is cause for alarm.




I think you may have accidentally posted this in the wrong forum... this is the jesus nuts against the NWO forum....at least these days.



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hastobemoretolife
Yea, there is no media bias, no, not at all.


I think this media blitz is going to backfire on them.


Excuse me; not coming against you, but has the health-care bill been stopped? What makes you think for a moment that people are going to, "react" to the move with the implied climate change?

While I am all for that, "rosy picture", experience in reality tells me otherwise. So what does that mean?

It means that the climate bills will be inforced to the point of aiding in the final blow to our economy. They said they're going to shift the powers from those that have to those that have not.

The obamination which makes desolate is now set in place so get ready for total lack; because he is literally delivering the final death blows to the once was U.S.A.. The only way to stop them would be to revolt; and that's not going to happen at all.

No consequencE..

Thank you.


[edit on 7-12-2009 by noconsequence]



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 11:31 AM
link   
Let me put it into more lame words that perhaps some will understand . . .

Climate change is all about money, get it? is nothing but somebody and some groups capitalizing and cashing out on the newest trend, blaming humans for the earth cycles after all we can not blame the sun or earth itself, because they can not be taxed, but we humans are.

Wake up people is thousands of lobbyist in congress making sure that a climate bill will enrich their pockets, and the climate will still change and is not a darn thing that any of us will be able to stop



posted on Dec, 7 2009 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by above
 

Please, for the love of Pete stop buying into the hype that the climate change emails suggest that climate change is a hoax.

Do some research, read the articles in the Economist or any other magazine that reported on this objectively, and you'll see the people who are telling you that these emails 'suggest' the evidence is being manipulate are either ignorant of the facts or pushing their own agenda.

The hacked emails say no such thing. They just don't. It's not a matter of opinion, it's fact. Honestly, read the rest of the literature surrounding them or even the rest of the emails if you don't believe me.

littlegreenfootballs.com...

(hat tip to Charles Johnson)


[edit on 7-12-2009 by kenochs]




top topics



 
29
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join