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.


New NASA Data Blow Gaping Hole In Global Warming Alarmism:

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 02:34 AM
Excellent news indeed, at least we are not contributing worse than what we thought
edit on 29-7-2011 by daaskapital because: because

posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 02:41 AM
reply to post by anon72

Here's a rebuttal to your article:

Climate Change Debunked?Not So Fast

edit on 29-7-2011 by Perplexedandconfused because: missing letter

posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 02:50 AM

Not being able to see that there is mayor changes in the clima lately is blind. I am only 30 and even in my short live it has changed a lot.

Also, you just have to live around ex. U.S. and you will problery already have noticed some strange weather.

I enjoy to watch storm chasers and even they say that the storms has changed.

To below poster:


Should help you to move on.

edit on 29/7/11 by Hilltaker because: Helping others.

posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 02:55 AM
Hmm,theres lot of posters on this thread backing up the whole "global warming" thing,but i dont see to many sources of facts to back them up.

Remember,your the believers of it,not me,so the burden of proof is on you.It doesnt matter if government "scientists" say its happening(when its clearly not) and they say they have "proof" because i dont believe a thing they say to be honest with you,i question it all.I look into everything that they say and the "facts" they claim to have,but all in all they have aboslutely nothing to support it.They didnt have anything back when global warming scare tactics was introduced by Margaret Thatcher and they dont have anything now either.

Before the 1980s this hypothesis was usually regarded as a curiosity because the nineteenth century calculations indicated that mean global temperature should have risen more than 1°C by 1940, and it had not.

Then, in 1979, Mrs Margaret Thatcher (now Lady Thatcher) became Prime Minister of the UK, and she elevated the hypothesis to the status of a major international policy issue.


Peronsally,if anything.I would be more concerned with this so called deterioration of the electromagnetic field,because its thats really happening,thats a very dangerous concept.
Dont get me wrong,so would be man made climate change if it was actually true,but everything leads to it being scare tactics,fear mongering,money making.Pretty much a breathing tax,and if not a breathing tax now,it can be used as a gateway further down the track to create a tax of us actually breathing and farting.
Thats what i dont like about it.

Just remember,everything on this Earth can do what we do,but better or at a larger scale.If you think we have any control over this planet,your bloody kidding yourselves.
The only thing we control here is the lifeforms,mainly ourselves,but as well as the wildlife to a degree.

If you cant understand what im saying,go back to school.Actually,no wait,dont got back to school because they are indoctrinating the kiddies to think the same way as you,to just believe and not question it.

Just logically here for a second,just put all the government talk on this matter aside for a moment.
Now these "scientists" are probably the same ones that claimed :

That oil was going to run out,remember that? Peak Oil? well,hasnt happened yet and we are actually finding more oil,not running out.(not saying we should go crazy on oil use though,far from it)

That we were going to have a Ice age,a small one they claimed,where is it? once again,it never happened.

Im pretty sure some scientists also claimed Y2K was going to happen,which didnt,but im not sure about that.

Anyways,now they want us to swallow that the climate is changing because of man made activitys.Well let me tell you that not even in our wildest dreams would we be able to control the climate like that.Either not for a very,very long time,if ever.Also at that kind of scale too.
Even with the proposed uses of what HAARP or anything else we have that may be able and capable of to achieve it,it is still not possible at that kind of scale.Because you will pretty much have to control the sun to able to do something like that.

The last thing i would like to mention is that,if you research,just a little bit, about volcanoes.You will find out that they emit more CO2 in one eruption than we do in years.Not only that,CO2 is in the atmosphere natrually,theres nothing we can do about it,its just a natrual cycle of nature,nothing more,nothing less.We also need it to live,because through the photosynthesis process,CO2 is converted to O2 for breathing lifeforms to breath and allows them to live here natrually.
By the way,im no scientist,this is basic science you learn at school if they taught it to you.
If everyone remembered this simple concept and wasnt so worried about the latest gossip,then there would be alot more people opposing such a tax or concept on living beings,its sickening to me personally.

If you look even further into CO2,you will find that the more CO2 in the atmosphere,the more larger and dense things will grow.Thats why there was larger flora and fauna back around,say when the dinosaurs roamed the Earth and such,there was a larger amount of CO2 in the atmospehre,alot more.
And yet lifeforms still roamed the earth,they didnt die because of it.

Seriously,look into everything ive said,and you will find its all been proven and are facts.
Dont take my word for it,if your serious about debating this subject,then look into it and come back with something worth while to say.

If your serious about this subject,then prove me wrong of what ive just said.
I doubt any of you will be able to,because its the truth,and they are simple facts.
Its far from being anything to hard to understand,even if you didnt go to school or learn these things.

And,the truth my friends,always holds itself up,always.

Good Luck.


edit on 29-7-2011 by BillyBoBBizWorth because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 03:11 AM
Hi again,

Very interesting thread in regards to what we are talking about here.

Maybe that is actually what is causing all the changes. - Still check wiki for facts around global warming. Very interesting.


posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 03:19 AM
reply to post by fenceSitter

Well, it's not a coincidence (because it had never to do anything with co2), but it IS melting, they are trying to blame us (co2) for their own agenda. Whatever that is.
They probably know it's melting for a very long time know and it will continue to melt (probably completely), but they try to cover it up this way. Earth is changing constantly and this is probably something what is happening in cycles (and I think they know this).

But that's what I'm thinking though.

posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 04:04 AM
reply to post by dillweed
If man is having no effect on the enviroment of this planet, explain these 'mysterious' events.

Marine extinction

Ozone layer hole,

Both of these catastrophic ongoing events are directly linked to human activity/stupidity,
go find me some 'scientific proof to prove otherwise 'or continue burying your head in th sand'

posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 04:23 AM
reply to post by SaturnFX

Ummm, what??? Excuse me, global warming has been proven to be happening??? In which dimension? Not this one. In early 2010, a few months after the Climate-Gate emails were released online, Phil Jones of the Climatic Research Unit at East Anglia U, associated with the UN's IPCC, admitted on the BBC, go watch it for yourself on youtube, that there has been no statistical warming since 1995...he made other astonishing confessions.
And, it is easy enough to find out for yourself that the globe has been cooling since 2007. I mean why do you think they changed the name from Global Warming to Climate Change? Either way, it is natural, and caused by the sun. Yes we do need to find cleaner sources of energy, but, while the powers that be continue to confuse the issues with false claims of man made climate change, and references to carbon di-oxide as a pollutant, (while they dump countless tonnes of aluminum, barium, and strontium in the air...), they are not to be trusted nor co-operated with.

posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 04:49 AM
reply to post by Perplexedandconfused

Thanks Perplexedandconfused.
Seems people don't read the thread before posting. Either that or they do but choose to ignore any evidence that contradicts their beliefs. So, here it is again (bump)

Please read before posting:
Topic is a Sham

posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 05:09 AM
reply to post by Tinmaddog


Or perhaps that is what they want us to believe.

The truth is out there and it will reviel itself in the end.

Also, how can you guys state "atleast we are not contributing as much as we thought"?

LMAO you and me or nobody of us knows a flying F... if we are contributing "more than we thought".

edit on 29/7/11 by Hilltaker because: Annoyed.

posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 06:12 AM
reply to post by Perplexedandconfused

The Sky Really is Falling... trust us.....again.. No thanks.

It all comes down to scientist that aren't that good, justifying their payckecks.

Remember, "Concensus" ISN'T fact(s). They still haven't proven it... thus the faked/forged/atlered/manipulate/withheld info.

Thus justifying thier professional existence.

If you really want to see that it is all BS> Do some research on your own countrys past weather history. When you are done, come back and tell me this cycle isn't a cycle.

It was just about three weeks ago the Sun was going into "Hybernation" and we should be getting cooler... Wait, those scientist don't count.....


Every generation think they live in the worst of times.... for one reason or another.
edit on 7/29/2011 by anon72 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 06:14 AM
reply to post by Tinmaddog

Thanks for the advice Mr. Junior Moderator.

See your new. Welcome aboard.

Mind expanding on your comment, beleifs, facts etc.

See you around.

posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 07:05 AM

Originally posted by SaturnFX
That always confused me..."tree huggers". don't like tree's? who the ---- doesn't like trees?

Everyone likes trees, a tree hugger is someone who likes them more than people (who would impoverish people for their sake etc. etc.).

posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 07:06 AM
The Earth goes through cycles of heating and cooling, "global warming" is a natural occurance. Granted we may be speeding it up slightly, but it will happen reguardless. This whole issue is moot if you ask me.

posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 07:17 AM

Originally posted by OwenGP185
Remember people they are saying less than expected, I would prefer a bit more detail as to how much. Still it doesnt say anything about global warming being a myth. The thing is we need green energy so it is important we move away from fossil fuels. Co2 and the other gasses surrounding us still need to be cut down even if global warming is one day proven to be a lie. We need alternative energies if we want less polution and to protect the enviroment/our health.
edit on 28-7-2011 by OwenGP185 because: (no reason given)

Why does CO2 needs to be cut down?... This is the problem with the people who still believe the AGW/Anthropogenic Global Warming hoax. CO2 is PLANT is not a pollutant, and it is needed for Gaia, All plants, and animals as well as mankind...

Several studies have shown that HIGHER concentrations of atmospheric CO2 is BENEFICIAL, and not detrimental. In fact some studies sugest about 1,200ppm-1,500ppm of atmospheric CO2 makes trees, plants and all green biomass on Earth stronger, and it increases the yield of food produced by plants from 25%-60%...

People who own greenhouses INCREASE the atmospheric CO2 content to increase the yield of their harvests, but since MORE FOOD is not what the rich elites want for mankind since they want to depopulate the Earth they made up this hoax known as AGW. Not to mention that they saw they could squeeze more money from people by claiming CO2 is bad...

Carbon dioxide enrichment involves increasing the concentrations of CO2 to 4-5 times the normal atmospheric levels, to between 1200-1500 ppm in an enclosed space. Enrichment has been shown to promote faster growth, higher yields, and stronger, healthier plants. Levels higher than 2000 ppm have been shown to retard plant growth. Low levels of CO2 (below 200) have been show to halt vigorous growth, even when all other conditions are ideal. Because of this, any enclosed space requires replenishment of the internal CO2 as it is used by plants, either from ventilation or from CO2 supplementation.

The claim that we must cut down/entrap the 380-390ppm atmospheric CO2 that now exists on Earth's atmosphere is nothing more than an uneducated falsehood.

posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 07:33 AM
reply to post by anon72

Oh I've been here a long time, reading threads all the way through - some good...some bad.
They usually devolve into two parties bashing each other, avoiding to acknowledge evidence contrary to their own opinions, and failing to scrutinize their sources.

After years of lurking around here, I've only recently decided to register. I pointed out that it appeared that some people hadn't read the linked article before pledging their allegiances to the questionably sourced (imo) topic article.

You noticed that I've only recently registered and decide to noob-bash me? I personally don't have a favorite side in this argument. That's why I'm here: to see what evidence surfaces so as to be better informed about this issue.
Like I said, I don't have a favorite, but I have an opinion as to who is winning.


posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 07:38 AM
reply to post by CasiusIgnoranze

Whene "global warming" first showed it's ugly head, I think the claims were ligit and people jumped on the band wagon with good intentions. But as time went on, there is no doubt in my mind, TPTB introduced the carbon tax dispite knowing that global warming was a non-issue and just like you said, taxing the air we breathe. But we should continue on the path we are on. Being greener IS better for all of us....unless NASA is in kahoots with Gig Oil....but I wouldn't think so.

posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 07:53 AM

Originally posted by XLR8R

Whene "global warming" first showed it's ugly head, I think the claims were ligit and people jumped on the band wagon with good intentions. But as time went on, there is no doubt in my mind, TPTB introduced the carbon tax dispite knowing that global warming was a non-issue and just like you said, taxing the air we breathe. But we should continue on the path we are on. Being greener IS better for all of us....unless NASA is in kahoots with Gig Oil....but I wouldn't think so.

NASA doesn't have to be in cahooots with big oil, but they are in bed with the UN, as well as the rich elites and the whole AGW hoax more so that Hansen has been the director of NASA.

posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 08:23 AM
reply to post by anon72

Hey, who wants to bet this is why Obama wants to shut down NASA? Any takers? NO? Didn't think so! Before even reading past the OP, betting some defend the whole GW ideas anyway.

posted on Jul, 29 2011 @ 08:32 AM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


new topics

top topics

<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in