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.


Who thinks man made global warming is fake, speak up

page: 2
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 09:22 PM
Global warming is manmade...tied directly to the advent of Buffaloe Wings. Hey...all that hot sauce, wing sauce, and warming was bound to happen.
Further, with the increase demand of chicken wings...prices go up, and until the last couple of years, was going through roof. Then what happened? Down turned economy, no disposable income, hot wing demand goes down and guess what happens?... Cooling.
It's all about the hot wings. That's it...yup.
NoNoNo...Global warming is fake. the weather is always changing, always has, always will.

posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 09:44 AM
as many have stated in no way is it man made..or to me even existing.
We are having the coldest winter in southern usa in 30 year's...what happen isnt coldest winter in 30 years a cool down lol

it's tax tax tax..and power all a plot to limit how many children we have ect...

posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 09:58 AM
Here you go folks - even the scientists that helped create the farce that is "anthropomorphic Global Warming" are jumping ship - UN Scientists now say that Global Warming has "paused" and we can expect cooling for the next 10-20 years....I guess humans aren't the cause after all, huh?
Here's the link:


posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 10:04 AM

You make like this video, as any idiot can find propaganda written all over it.

[edit on 12-1-2010 by jonnyc55]

posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 10:16 AM
reply to post by SuperSlovak

We don't have the scope at the moment to know for sure if manmade global warming is in fact fake or in any way real.. But most of the so called "Facts" and "Predictions" surrounding it are speculation based on speculation which in turn has been affected by a Political, Corporate, Environmental and Globalized agenda. Those for Manmade global warming are buying marketed manipulation and those against it are doing the same.

What we do know for a fact is though.. we have to stop stripping the planet of resources and cut down on our pollution so even though the Global warming crowd blow the effects of our pollution on the environment way out of proportion.. their end result is correct. We should look after our planet.

So the Yanks, Chinese and Australian's should cop on, grow up and get in line with the EU & Japanese targets for pollution cuts or face the wrath of peak oil in a couple of decades.

posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 10:20 AM
I think it is fake so..?

posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 10:21 AM
I'm not addressing climate change at all in my post, but we have a real problem IMHO....

Coal is NASTY, old school fuel.

I am in the environmental biz, and have been in about 100 different coal fired power plants across the us. I have been involved with removing these problems, and have seen lots of stack testing data. These are just a tiny portion of the problems we get from burning coal.

Do you all know what comes out of a coal fired power plants stack?
Some of the trace elements are:

Some of the other airborn nasties are:

In the solid waste (flyash) we get:
and 4)Radiation

Now realize that each plant is putting out hundreds of thousands of cubic feet of exhaust per min., and multiply that by the number of coal power plants in the world,and you might start to see the scale of this pollution.
If you want to freak yourself out just take the volume of air on earth and see how often these power plants alone change the air.

I'm not trying to be a party pooper to the anti global warming folks, but we are giving ourselves cancer with these coal fired power plants. Global warming is not the only problem. Do a tiny bit of reasearch and then tell me I am wrong about coal.

Back on topic:
I think we should consider methane, methane hydrate, CO2 and any gas that could contribute to the proposed greenhouse effect to explore the full possibility of man's contribution to the effect. Volcano's and earth farts add to it, but the amount of "CO2 WE SPEW" is large.

Put that in yer pipe and smoke it!


[edit on 12-1-2010 by SLaPPiE]

posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 10:30 AM
reply to post by SLaPPiE

Hey, stick THIS in your pipe and smoke it.

Originally posted by The_Seeker
God yeah. I posted this on another thread but thought it again relevant here.

Sorry I dont have the original link as this was sent to me via email.

Truth about coal powered power genration
This article appeared in the Rockhampton morning Bulletin on 22.12.09.
This is an excellent piece for my friends to send to their politicians or to anybody who needs
to be educated about Australia's Coal driven power houses. Terry is now retired and is in
excellent health at age 69. Nobody paid him to write the article which was, (to their credit),
published by the local press.
Written By Terence Cardwell
The Editor
The Morning Bulletin.
I have sat by for a number of years frustrated at the rubbish being put forth about carbon
dioxide emissions, thermal coal fired power stations and renewable energy and the ridiculous
Emissions Trading Scheme.
Frustration at the lies told (particularly during the election) about global pollution. Using
Power Station cooling towers for an example. The condensation coming from those cooling
towers is as pure as that that comes out of any kettle.
Frustration about the so called incorrectly named man made 'carbon emissions' which of
course is Carbon Dioxide emissions and what it is supposedly doing to our planet.
Frustration about the lies told about renewable energy and the deliberate distortion of
renewable energy and its ability to replace fossil fuel energy generation. And frustration at
the ridiculous carbon credit programme which is beyond comprehension.
And further frustration at some members of the public who have not got a clue about thermal
Power Stations or Renewable Energy. Quoting ridiculous figures about something they
clearly have little or no knowledge of.
First coal fired power stations do NOT send 60 to 70% of the energy up the chimney. The
boilers of modern power station are 96% efficient and the exhaust heat is captured by the
economisers and reheaters and heat the air and water before entering the boilers.
The very slight amount exiting the stack is moist as in condensation and CO2. There is
virtually no fly ash because this is removed by the precipitators or bagging plant that are
99.98% efficient. The 4% lost is heat through boiler wall convection.
Coal fired Power Stations are highly efficient with very little heat loss and can generate
massive amount of energy for our needs. They can generate power at efficiency of less than
10,000 b.t.u. per kilowatt and cost wise that is very low.
The percentage cost of mining and freight is very low. The total cost of fuel is 8% of total
generation cost and does NOT constitute a major production cost.
As for being laughed out of the country, China is building multitudes of coal fired power
stations because they are the most efficient for bulk power generation.
We have, like, the USA, coal fired power stations because we HAVE the raw materials and are
VERY fortunate to have them. Believe me no one is laughing at Australia - exactly the
reverse, they are very envious of our raw materials and independence.
The major percentage of power in Europe and U.K. is nuclear because they don't have the
coal supply for the future.
Yes it would be very nice to have clean, quiet, cheap energy in bulk supply. Everyone agrees
that it would be ideal. You don't have to be a genius to work that out. But there is only one
problem---It doesn't exist.
Yes - there are wind and solar generators being built all over the world but they only add a
small amount to the overall power demand.
The maximum size wind generator is 3 Megawatts, which can rarely be attained on a
continuous basis because it requires substantial forces of wind. And for the same reason only
generate when there is sufficient wind to drive them. This of course depends where they are
located but usually they only run for 45% -65% of the time, mostly well below maximum
capacity. They cannot be relied for a 'base load' because they are too variable. And they
certainly could not be used for load control.
The peak load demand for electricity in Australia is approximately 50,000 Megawatts and
only small part of this comes from the Snowy Hydro Electric System (The ultimate power
Generation) because it is only available when water is there from snow melt or rain. And yes
they can pump it back but it cost to do that. (Long Story).
Tasmania is very fortunate in that they have mostly hydro electric generation because of their
high amounts of snow and rainfall. They also have wind generators (located in the roaring
forties) but that is only a small amount of total power generated.
Based on an average generating output of 1.5 megawatts (of unreliable power) you would
require over 33,300 wind generators.
As for solar power generation much research has been done over the decades and there are
two types. Solar thermal generation and Solar Electric generation but in each case they
cannot generate large amounts of electricity.
Any clean, cheap energy is obviously welcomed but they would NEVER have the capability of
replacing Thermal power generation. So get your heads out of the clouds, do some basic
mathematics and look at the facts not going off with the fairies (or some would say the
extreme greenies.)
We are all greenies in one form or another and care very much about our planet. The
difference is most of us are realistic. Not in some idyllic utopia where everything can be made
perfect by standing around holding a banner and being a general pain in the backside.
Here are some facts that will show how ridiculous this financial madness the government is
following. Do the simple maths and see for yourselves.
According to the 'believers' the CO2 in air has risen from .034% to .038% in air over the last
50 years.
To put the percentage of Carbon Dioxide in air in a clearer perspective;
If you had a room 12 ft x 12 ft x 7 ft or 3.7 mtrs x 3.7 mtrs x 2.1 mtrs, the area carbon
dioxide would occupy in that room would be .25m x .25m x .17m or the size of a large
packet of cereal.
Australia emits 1 percent of the world's total carbon Dioxide and the government wants to
reduce this by twenty percent or reduce emissions by .2 percent of the world's total CO2
What effect will this have on existing CO2 levels?
By their own figures they state the CO2 in air has risen from .034% to .038% in 50 years.
Assuming this is correct, the world CO2 has increased in 50 years by .004 percent.
Per year that is .004 divided by 50 = .00008 percent. (Getting confusing -but stay with me).
Of that because we only contribute 1% our emissions would cause CO2 to rise .00008 divided
by 100 = .0000008 percent.
Of that 1%, we supposedly emit, the governments wants to reduce it by 20% which is 1/5th
of .0000008 = .00000016 percent effect per year they would have on the world CO2
emissions based on their own figures.
That would equate to a area in the same room, as the size of a small pin.!!!
For that they have gone crazy with the ridiculous trading schemes, Solar and roofing
installations, Clean coal technology. Renewable energy, etc, etc.
How ridiculous it that.
The cost to the general public and industry will be enormous. Cripple and even closing some
smaller business.
T.L. Cardwell
To the Editor I thought I should clarify. I spent 25 years in the Electricity Commission of
NSW working, commissioning and operating the various power units. My last was the 4 X 350
MW Munmorah Power Station near Newcastle. I would be pleased to supply you any
information you may require.
1,204 Words.

You need to go to this thread and spread your wares-Church of Climatology

CO2 is NOT a pollution, carbon credit scam has nothing to do with climate change or global warming.

posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 10:32 AM
Oh i cant believe we are still going round in circles , whether global warming is increased by man or not !

We are still needlessly polluting our environment when we can move to cleaner emission free fuels !

Yet we would still rather make a profit than accept the fact that we are damaging our environments irreversibly !

Thats the fact that we dont want to accept , because we are to scared to face up to the problem , and the big oil / energy companies dont want to lose profit , they wouyld rather destroy ocean habitats , and forests

fossil fuels still create acid rain and are changing the levels of acid in the oceans and damaging habitats !

So please think about that instead of the great debate of whether we are creating the warming or its the planet !

posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 10:34 AM

Originally posted by SuperSlovak
The media needs to explain this, but there’s the exact point; they can’t because it’s all made up. Man does not have the capability to destroy the planet, yet we throw away trillions trying to correct the damage we think we've done.

[edit on 11-1-2010 by SuperSlovak]

I take issue with the statement that we do not have the capability of destroying our planet.

I think mankind has done everything in its power to destroy the planet either consciously or by turning a blind eye. Our drinking water is laden with toxins, drugs, refuse, plastics, unwanted by-products of too rich to care corporations. We level our mountains to get at coal which cause catastrophic landslides when the loose sediment cannot impede the natural rainwater it easily took in stride for thousands of years prior. We slash and burn the rain forest, the lungs of our world, to make soybean farms to feed cattle so we can have cheap hamburgers. There is a patch of garbage and plastic TWICE the size of Texas floating in the Pacific that has created a deadzone depleting the oxygen and releasing toxic chemicals. I could go on and on but I'm trying to make a point not just rant. Whether you believe in global warming or not is irrelevant to our capacity for destroying our world.

Let me ask this, if global warming is proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be a farce for all to see would you cease to care about the environment in its entirety? There are countless ways for us to destroy nature and just because you or I don't believe in global warming doesn't mean we should accelerate our path to polluting our world.

Point is, don't put your enviro-eggs in the global warming basket. These issues can be parsed and they should be.

posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 10:40 AM
hello, CO2 is %0.004 of the total atmosphere, thats 383 parts per million, I don't think so little gas can have so much effect on the other %99.006.
there have been reports in other posts on ATS of a huge cloud our solar system is passing through that is heating up all the planets, not just ours, sorry, I read so much stuff these days I have no idea who's post its in, by the time I find it I will have forgotten who I was supposed to send it too, after all, I am nearly 66!
Here is something else I have remembered, humans produce 35 gigatons of gas and particulates every year, the 'natural' world, including volcanoes, produces 350 gigatons per year.
Volcanic activity has gone up %300 per the past 2000 years.
according to 'Geophysical research letters' there has been NO rise in CO2 fraction in the last 160 years.
the 'daily tech' has run an article stating that the japanese dispute humans are the cause of global warming.

posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 10:40 AM
reply to post by endisnighe

I will now slowly rip your bs apart.

Coal is burning at 1350 degrees F in the combustor, thru the boiler and economizer where it exits to the baghouse or precipitator at about 425 degrees F. Your efficiency statement is a total load of it.

Where in the heck do you think the fly ash goes? To the the freaking truck load. Just go look at the flay ash holding silo's at any coal fired power plant. Note how much of it goes flying when the truck is loaded. Let me know what the landfill charges to hold that crap. Again your document=crap.

You may continue to spew all the crap you like, as you are...just wrong.

posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 10:44 AM
even if it was real i don't see how money is going to solve the problem. at the end of those dollers paying for surely a car is always going to be driven. its big time BS. i don't believe that everytime i breath out i'm destroying the world, thats ludicrous.

posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 10:45 AM
Why do people always go off on general pollution questions when AGW is discussed? I don't think anybody is saying we should pollute, we are saying that the global warming/cap n trade thing is a scam. It won't help pollution. They are very different issues.

I'll believe in global warming when all the fat cats get rid of their private jets and become vegans. (well at least I will consider it then)

posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 10:49 AM
The whole CO2 deal is not a lie. CO2 is a known greenhouse gas. At the moment the amount of CO2 is relatively small compared to the natural amount of CO2. However, as the population of the world increases exponentially, so does the amount of CO2 we generate (theoretically, if we do nothing to curb our CO2 output). This problem will only get worse as third world nations continue to develop and industrialize.

There are other factors which naturally (anything not done by man) contribute to the the temperature. To say, "wow it's really cold outside today, this proves that man made climate change is false"; would be likes saying, "without man made climate change the world would have exactly the same temperatures every year". Because we know the second statement is not true, we can assume that the first one is ridiculous.

The theory behind man made climate change is completely true. What we need to study is how much of an effect this will have on the actual temperature. Even if our CO2 footprint is relatively small compared to what naturally occurs, that extra CO2 can still be enough to throw things out of balance.

posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 10:51 AM
Golbal Warming caused by Man is unadulterated BS! We had more Global Warming in Biblical Times than we do now and the Polar Bears are still

posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 10:54 AM
reply to post by Reptilian Ph.D

Rises in Carbon Dioxide have been found to have occurred during past historical periods of global warming (i.e., prior to the modern industrial age).

This means that the rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide may be an effect of global warming and not necessarily a cause.

[edit on 1/12/2010 by Soylent Green Is People]

posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 10:56 AM
Global warming in and of itself is very real. The story, whether fiction or non-fiction, exisits. It is everywhere. It is on a global scale. Just like fake eyelashes and fake fingernails, global warming is real even though it is not nature made. It is man made. A story created by man to bring in masses of opprotunities to make tons of money and to also have many very serious consequences.
Whether you believe it or not, there are 100's of millions of people on earth who will believe we are going to suffer catastrophic outcomes because they "believe" what is presented to them. That is a huge audience.
The puppets in control now have a source to feed their philosophy too. They will watch it from seed to stalks. Then when it is ripe for the picking, Gore or those in his puppet theater (United Nations, CDC and alike) will then create another global situation to feed...

When you have the audiences' attention, you must be a very good sales person. Not everyone can sell ice to eskimos but some are actually profiting from this exact example. Global warming is a world-wide global marketing scheme. Like most acts of situation, they will present an angle or a clique. Global warming has many different schemes so as to apply to many aspects of the watching audience.
For example: the Fear-monger - these people believe the story as it is presented to them period.
Next is the Do-gooder - these people must have every lightbulb in their home "green" because of the enviroment. This example could go to infinity really.
Next we have the Ah-whats - this part of the audience will ask these questions over and over: ah-what does the enviromentally safe garbage bag do for me? Ah-what does recycling plastic do for me etc etc...
Then we have the AH-huhs! - these are your average joes who see this as a profitable source for income by pushing this nonesense into the next level. These Entrepreneur's will include their "going green" and include this into the packaging. Their product will be green and earth friendly looking.

Now take all that into consideration. It started out as global warming and a few years later it has turned into average people making a living off the "fake" story. Do you think the man on the street is going to say Global Warming is not real when he drives home 100K a year pushing his products. How about the major manufacturers who make millions pushing this idea? etc etc..
If the audience was not there, they could not sell it. Unfortunately for the rest of us who actually can think for ourselves.... this is the reality. We have to watch this oblivious humanity sink right before our eyes.
I myself can only say, I am thankful to myself that I can actually think for myself and not be their puppet on their string.

posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 10:58 AM
I'm NOT trying to say it's right to add carbon credits, and tax to companies due to GW, but we should do something about this BIG pollution problem our grandparents created for us to live on.

I would also like to remind everyone to include ALL of these wonderfull new Bio Fuel ethanol plants in considering total pollution. They don't just burn corn these days.

Listen to my new motto "Fossil fuel is old school". I made that sh_t up all by myself! (pats self on back).

Some of you guys get your panties all in an upraor over this climate change problem and ignore the real issues.....brilliant!

posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 10:58 AM
If you think its all about saving the world then you need to do some research. Why are the elitist buying up all the forest so they can turn around make money from the carbon credit scam. It's all just a new way to control the world population with a new tax.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4 >>

log in