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.

 

There's nothing down there to cause global warming

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 10:45 AM
link   
If you've travelled all over the world many times in an aircraft you will have noticed there is nothing down there.

No cities, no pollution stacks, nothing. There's a great, great expanse of nothingness.

People are led to believe there are smoke stacks everywhere. I imagine non travellers believe there are polluting factories every mile. This is not the case.

The earth is practically deserted. When you look at pollution from a global scale we could only be making the smallest of dents.

If we were going to terraform a new planet, what we are doing now just wouldn't cut it.




posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 11:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by ppk55
If you've travelled all over the world many times in an aircraft you will have noticed there is nothing down there.

No cities, no pollution stacks, nothing. There's a great, great expanse of nothingness.


Eh, nothing down there..? That's weird, I suppose this map of Earth's city lights at night must be yet another disinfo fake from NASA then.






This image of Earth’s city lights was created with data from the Defense Meteorological Satellite Program (DMSP) Operational Linescan System (OLS). Originally designed to view clouds by moonlight, the OLS is also used to map the locations of permanent lights on the Earth’s surface.

earthobservatory.nasa.gov...

More great pics of cities at night, taken from the the ISS. Well worth a look!

earthobservatory.nasa.gov...



posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 11:27 AM
link   
Could you possibly edit your picture to show the whole earth, including the whole of Australia ?



posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 11:57 AM
link   
Only 1 drop of venom from one of the most poisonous animals on Earth has the potential to kill hundreds.

Only one grain of radioactive material has the potential of effecting unlimited numbers of people before it gets harmless.

Fertilized land spills a little in the water system that ends up in the sea. Plankton feast on it an numbers rise in the billions. We eat the animals that eat it and Plankton dies of old age. It sinks to the bottom and it rots away. Bacteria feasting on it release a gas which replaces oxygen leaving the seas un livable for other animals.

I agree we do not impact the Earth with what we do that much...
But what we do triggers a spiral of ongoing events. Not all of them are such a big deal.
But only one with the potential to disrupt the balance is enough...



posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by ppk55
Could you possibly edit your picture to show the whole earth, including the whole of Australia ?


The pic is REALLY big, so I had to crop it to post it here. But you can click this link and view the large version of the pic:

earthobservatory.nasa.gov...

(Edit cause I thought I answered the OP! Sorry. )

[edit on 21/6/10 by ziggystar60]



posted on Jun, 21 2010 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by ppk55
 


No offence... but this just sounds like something you were daydreaming, while on a flight one day... Not very scientific and more of an uneducated opinion...

The world is a closed biosphere... you don’t need smokestacks everywhere to affect it!



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 04:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Muckster
 

Actually it's over the course of many, many flights in many parts of the world.
And no, I wasn't daydreaming, I was taking an active interest in what was below.

What I'm trying to say is, for someone that hasn't taken these flights, from the news it could be assumed there are polluting centres everywhere you look. Spread out on every available land mass.

What I found was a lot of desolation that went on for hours and hours.
Vast expanses of pretty much nothing.



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 08:52 AM
link   
There's nothing to see in this picture ......



...... except pollution stretching as far as the eye can see.


The Asian Brown Cloud is probably the best visual example of how human pollution covers a vast area of the Earth's surface, though less brown clouds also exist.

The Asian Brown Cloud has been known to drift as far as California - halfway around the planet.

www.nytimes.com...



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 08:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 


I've flown over asia many times and never seen this.

edit: This is the point I'm trying to get at. There are countless photos that show how bad things supposedly are, however where are all the photos that show most of the world is doing ok ?

I'll tell you why, because it's boring. Hey look over here, everything is fine.

And that is actually the case for most of the world. Of course doing well won't make anyone any money will it.





[edit on 22-6-2010 by ppk55]



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by ppk55
There are countless photos that show how bad things supposedly are, however where are all the photos that show most of the world is doing ok ?



But most of the world isn't doing okay. When you add up all the Brown Clouds, Massive Deforestation from Indonesia to India to Congo to Amazonia, the Great Pacific Garbage Patches, Desertification of the Sahara (and the American Dust Bowl), the almost complete drying up of the Aral Sea ...... And that's just the big, obvious bits.

The Sulfur aerosols that cause acid rain aren't visible, nor is the carbon dioxide that some argue is a major contributor to global warming. And all the time you're flying you're helping create clouds that would not naturally have formed and which themselves have some small impact - not least in making our skies hazy and less attractive!

[edit on 22-6-2010 by Essan]



posted on Jun, 22 2010 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Essan
 


I agree with and back up everything you have said...

I would also like to make the following point to ppk55... Just because you havent seen it doesnt mean that its not there...

I have seen ecological damage on a grand scale... From miles of dead corral in the Carribean to jellyfish blooms in the Mediterranean... When i worked in London, there were times (especially in the summer) i could look out of my office window and see a thick haze of smog. This smog has to go somewhere....

Contrary to what some people on ATS suggest... There is no big conspiracy to “pretend” that the earth is polluted...

The Earth IS polluted... a fact that has been proved over and over again in countless threads...

peace



posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 06:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Essan
Massive Deforestation from Indonesia to India to Congo to Amazonia,


When you say 'massive' it's in perspective to the area. Related to the rest of the world, it's a pin head.

This is the problem, people say 'oh, the forest is disappearing.' Yes, in isolation it looks bad, but put in a global perspective, it's minute.

When part of the arctic / antarctic ice mass shears off in a completely natural manner. it's whacked up on youtube with some emotionally stirring music. Some captions are added, and voila, global warming evidence.

The world is big, youtube makes it seem much smaller than it is.

edit: do you remember any of those tv specials that aired about a decade ago. We had one in Australia where the host breathlessly exclaimed 'Where I'm standing will be underwater in 10 years time.'

Guess what? You could still do that report today, in exactly the same place, and both would look identical.

[edit on 23-6-2010 by ppk55]



posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 07:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Muckster
The Earth IS polluted... a fact that has been proved over and over again in countless threads...
peace


While I was out jogging around Sydney harbour, I noticed a scuba diver near the concrete walls near Mrs Macquaire's Chair in Sydney.

I couldn't help but ask him what he was doing down there.

He told me he was checking drilled out core tubes or something like that to determine the health of the harbour. After asking if it was ok he told me the harbour was the healthiest he'd ever seen.

So there's one eye witness account of how things aren't necessarily as bad as they seem.

To this day I'm still confused as to why I asked a complete stranger in a scuba suit to answer my questions.



posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 07:57 AM
link   
reply to post by ppk55
 


Why would you want to trivialize polution?
I fly all the time, and USA and China are full of coal fired plants.

Instead of your generalistic simple aproach, why not actually learn something while proving yourself wrong.
Why don't you tell us how far the hg goes from those few stacks, then let me know how much of it ends up in the ocean, rivers and lakes.

If you were talking about percentage of populated land vs not, I would agree that there is much land that man has not messed with. However it seems more like you are pointing out that there is much free land to exploit.



posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 10:02 AM
link   
I'm just saying what I see. God forbid.
And there's just not that much down there. Sorry to reveal the facts.
edit: see above posts for explanation.

[edit on 23-6-2010 by ppk55]



posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 10:36 AM
link   
reply to post by ppk55
 


I know what you're saying ... there are so many vast tracts of land on earth uninhabited or sparsely inhabited by humans that it seems unlikely that we could be a problem source. You see both extremes from a plane however. It took about 40 minutes of flight to cover the urban nightlit sprawl of Toronto, and perhaps half an hour of sprawl in Vancouver to reach the airport, and those are far from the largest cities around. I can imagine how much more extreme the cityscapes become in the UK or Japan, where population densities are much higher. Air particulates are the telling factors, as many locales don't measure much more than CO2 and a handful of other media-popularized gases which we are supposed to concentrate our entire concern on. Yes, carbon dioxide will warm the atmosphere, as with methane ( 20x more than CO2 ), but these are not the biggest concerns for human and creature health on earth, nor for our biosphere. The particulates we ought be primarily concerned with, such as aluminum, barium, manganese, sulphur, and especially heavy metals, are rarely listed or publicly measured for disclosure. We know it's a problem from private research.



posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 11:52 AM
link   
Ever fly over the Gulf of Mexico? How long to you suppose it took your jet liner at cruising speed to fly past the space occupied by the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig?

It's really easy to look down, as you fly over the Gulf, and say "there's nothing down there, just water as far as the eye can see".



posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 01:12 PM
link   
Let's just agree that the Earth is polluted while at the same time there is still enought here still untouched that can be saved. The way I see it we are all responsible for these messes , though some more than others. The idiots who go around cutting down trees , a tree for goodness sake , something that makes oxygen , sequesters carbon , fixes nitrogen , distills water , accrues solar energy as feul , makes complex sugars in food , creates microclimates , changes color with the seasons , self replicates...... , they say "why don't we knock that down and write on it or build houses with it"(insane). And hunting animals to extinction like japan is doing with whales and dolphins , hellooo , once their all gone or down to the last ten what are you gonna hunt afterwards?!

Then there are the idiots in brazil , africa and indonesia deforesting the earth's lungs , their behaving like cigarettes. Now get this , the most assanine excuse for this moronic act on the brazillians part is they gotta cut down the Amazon rainforest to clear land for their cattle and whatnot. Before they did that the rainforests recycled carbon dioxide into oxygen and provided a biodiverse home for millions of organisms and plants , many undiscoverd and could hold future cures. After the deforestation or devastation I call it all we have left is bare soil , more carbon dioxide that goes unrecycled and the biosphere now only supports two organisms , man and the cow. Further Amazonian Rainforest soil is not very fertile it is considered to be a wet desert since the rain washes out most of the nutrients , so where is the logic in clearing this land for cattle. Stupid just stupid. Remember Chico Mendes.

Now onto Big Business. See what a good foul up we've recently had with the BP gulf oil spill. Then there's the illegal toxic dumping in the coastal waters off Somalia that destroyed the fishing industry there and hey presto we get somali pirates. Then there's the sinister Monsanto who wants to have a monopoly on all plants and seeds (humans come from seeds too) , how much more greedy can you get?! China's faulty cheep goods loaded with lead , the milk loaded with melamine. Fastest growing economy my tucus , more like fastest growing farce. Workers rights is poorly enforced if ever , people are made to labor under deplorable conditions and paid pennies to the nickle , slave labor.
The growing wealth goes to the top few.


[edit on 23-6-2010 by De La Valletta]



posted on Jun, 23 2010 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by ppk55

Originally posted by Essan
Massive Deforestation from Indonesia to India to Congo to Amazonia,


When you say 'massive' it's in perspective to the area. Related to the rest of the world, it's a pin head.


Indeed. If the rainforests cover only 1% of the planet and we destroy 99% of them then it's only affected 0.99% of the planet. But 99% of all the rainforests - which in turn affect the weather over 100% of the planet.

Still, some like to live in plastic bottles and don't care what happens to the world so long as they are all right today. After all, who cares if the Orang Utangs are extinct so long as we get the latest CD a day early? Eh? Shame about your children though ..... but who cares about them? The important thing is that we have everything we want today. Because we are King.

It's likely that we are on the threshold of the biggest extinction event in 250,000,000 years. And we are all 100% responsible. Still, at least we'll have a place in history, eh?



posted on Jun, 25 2010 @ 08:15 AM
link   
Why I believe we are just a pin prick ...

The volcano in iceland has just undone everyone's efforts.

The bushfires in Australis just undid everyones efforts.

The gulf of mexico incident just undid everyone's efforts.
edit: and if it didn't happen by force, it's been proven to happen by nature

To say the average person has any effect is complete rubbish compared to the enormous polluting power the earth has.

And for every species they keep saying is being eliminated, there's a new one being found. How the hell did we survive all the previous extinction events. Lucky there weren't any do gooders around then.. they would have had a field day.

english.chosun.com...

There's a million more new discoveries if you care to look them up ... but I doubt you will.



[edit on 25-6-2010 by ppk55]




top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join