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.


climate change: an assault on the brain

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 05:01 AM
I don't know about anyone else, but all the climate change news is becoming extremely confusing to the lay man. what side of the argument should one reside. My opinion seems to change on a daily basis. One day i think humans are to blame for a warming of the planet. the next day I think it's all a scam by the world's elite.

To be honest I just don't know what to believe anymore. Most subjects i have a clear stance on things.Climate change just leaves me frustrated at the lack of a definitive answer. I think from now on i'm going to ignore climate change. If there's anything I can do to change it, it's probably too late. I've got enough to worry about without worrying my actions are destroying the world.

I am but a simple monkey, now where's my bananna's?

posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 05:02 AM
....well maybe that's just the point. Confuse the masses to get what you want, sounds pretty much like a conspiracy to me!

posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 05:05 AM
My only take on it is to have a respect for the world around me. I don't litter, or dump chemicals down sinks. I try not to be wasteful.

I can't really figure all their numbers out but global warming is the least of my concerns when I discuss the environment. I read a great article today reprinted online about the coming ice scare of the 70's. It was amazing the similarities.

You do what you think you can do to make this world a better place.

Paying more in taxes, will not help.

posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 05:07 AM
reply to post by Seiko

That was pretty well said, & makes much more sense than tacking another tax on the populations.

posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 05:14 AM
reply to post by Seiko

I agree on the TAX thing, that's what lends me to think it's a scam. when we have the Rothschild bank pushing for a carbon trading , set up under a new global operating system, you have to wonder what the f*&k is going on.

i just don't want to believe a scam could be played out with all the Scientists pointing to MMGW.

posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 05:22 AM
reply to post by woodwardjnr

Well not all scientists do. Scientific certainty is a big step. There are trends, there are markers. Not all scientists even agree on these.

The answer lies in funding. The government, or tptb at any given time in history have controlled scientific research more then you'd think at a glance. Right now grants are given for finding global warming causes, so that's what scientists do.

One example is of course Galileo. He was against flat earth beliefs, but did recant and toe the line when forced. Maybe other scientists are in similar situations with funding now.

Another example is verifying your own perspective. The internet has taught us how easy this trap is. Just about any idea I wish to postulate can be verified in some way or another online. In fact the preconceived notions that I bring with me will dictate how I search and what information I choose to filter and weigh.

Right now, global warming is in, so lots of information will point to it. Information will be created and discovered to verify the things that they want to believe. Just as in the 70's they were screaming about the coming ice age.

posted on Dec, 11 2009 @ 09:24 AM
Hi, I have always followed the idea that global warming is a scam, to get more money for the NWO, and this is becoming more apparent in the latest COP15 meetings, The IPCC insist that it is the view of most scientists that AGW is a fact, well thats just not true there are so many that have gone against the theory for many years, because of what they have found scientifically to be true, however every time they ask for the commonly used evidence they are refused access to it, which is contrary to the freedom of information act, here in the UK anyway. It now turns out that not only the University of East Anglia have some question to answer, but so to does NASA and the UK's met office, Here is a set of videos showing a different opinion to AGW, by some of the top scientists whom have been for want of a better word deliberately shut out of the equation. This is one of 9 so its a good idea to watch them all to get a good idea on what they have to say. Hope that helps.

posted on Dec, 12 2009 @ 12:40 AM
Al jazeera

Here's a decent piece by al jazeera laying out some fundamentals. All stories have bias, but this one seems to have less.

Reading the fine print Taylor says satellite data debunks theories that climate change is unnatural There is so much spin that you have to read the small print of the UN reports where they admit to not understanding natural cycles and what drives them. Behind the scenes they acknowledge cycles are at work and contribute to the warming and that it is only from the model that they derive the dominance of carbon dioxide. But the model does not easily simulate the poorly understood cycles. Satellites do a better job and having spent three years studying the data I conclude global warming is real but at least 80 per cent natural cycle and 20 per cent human emissions. My conclusions are supported by recent climate shifts that run counter to model predictions. From the data on cycles I could predict that after 2007, when Arctic summer ice reached a record low, it would start to recover. In 2008, it came back by 10 per cent. The majority expected it to continue its decline to ice-free status by 2015. In 2009, it grew by another 10 per cent.

new topics

top topics


log in