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.


CONFIRMED: Global Warming 'Ended 15 Years Ago'

page: 12
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in


posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 06:12 PM

Originally posted by ArMaP

Originally posted by Blaine91555
In the early 1970's I was taught in College that we were headed for an Ice Age and that all tree's would be dead by now. The Salmon were supposed to be gone. Oil reserves were supposed to be gone by now. Half the planet was supposed to starve to death.

I wasn't taught anything like that (and I never heard anything like that either), so I guess that only happened in some countries.

I had a radical Geology Prof who bombarded us with this stuff and there were a number of book that came out around the same time about it. That was in a University near Los Angeles.

It was almost exactly the same as now during my High School and College years. During the 60's and into the early 70's it was Vietnam, Civil Rights, the Cold War, Worldwide overpopulation and starvation, the coming Ice Age and the extinction of all life within the next forty or fifty years.

This fellow even gave us a paper that listed the dates each thing would occur.

By now we were supposed to be out of oil and natural gas, half the population was suppose to have starved, Uranium was supposed to be gone before the oil, the trees were supposed to go through a mass die off because the claimed they could not stand more than a three degree change in environment and anything else they could throw in the mix. Progressives had already taken over the Universities by the late 1960's.

It is cyclical and repeats. You go back to the late 1800's you will find similar doom and gloom scenario's and end of the world mania. Nothing new, just new people taking advantage of peoples fears.

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 06:37 PM

Originally posted by Reflection
See, this is the problem with all you fossil fuel addicts.

Sorry, but i just had to ask something after reading this statement. Where are you getting the power from to enable you to post on this forum? Is it 100% green? Do you drive a car? Catch a bus? Fly? Just seemed a bit rich to me to accuse non GW believers as "fossil fuel addicts" when chances are, you use as much as everyone else.

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 06:39 PM
250 million years ago, over 90 percent of life on the face of this planet was wiped out. This was due to a massive volcanic erruption that lasted a million years, and is today called the Siberian Traps. This eruption dumped so much CO2 into our atmosphere that global temps went up by 10 degrees.

Best argument I have ever heard.

Normally; the earth takes 250 million years to change temperature by 10 degrees. That's 1 degree in 25 million years.

And we are worried about 1 degree in 50 years, sheesh. What possible consequences could that have?

It was -19 today. Tomorrow, +5.

I don't get why people think global warming is just a giant tax scam to take peoples money. What's the difference between World Governments using global warming as an excuse to pay taxes, and Oil companies funding studies to produce the opposite in order to avoid paying carbon taxes?

The science still exists, no matter who is funding it. That's like saying that stopping whale hunting is a scam to make money, because whales have a nature breeding cycle and human activity cannot possibly have any impact on the climate or ecosystem.

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 07:00 PM
reply to post by chrismicha77

I agree chrismicha77. The two sources listed, (not completely legit) and the other source is just an article using the first one as a reference.

I think some people (op) just don't want to believe in science. I would also bet money that the OP is probably also a young earth creationist

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 07:49 PM
Glaciers are shrinking, btw. I attended a maritime conference on plans to open up shipping lanes through the arctic during the summer because of the unusual lack of ice. But if the Earth's warming it's probably not our fault. It warms/cools by itself all the time due to the sun's magnetic pole cycles/shifting.

Oil companies don't want people to get the idea that we're contributing - we probably aren't but that's how people would interpret it, and big-government politicians want to convince us that we're doomed and that we need to pay another tax to solve our problems.

Truth is, we just have to accept that certain things are out of our control.
edit on 30-1-2012 by CaptainIraq because: (no reason given)

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 07:54 PM
reply to post by Jimjolnir

Thanks there Jimjolnir!

Being new to ATS, I was at first hesitant to post in a thread like this. People get extremely heated (uuuhhhh....not sure if I intended that as a pun or not!) over this issue. Having read through many more pages since my post, I had to re-think my opinion that Facebook is a horrible place where people scream and yell at each other over politics.

Indeed. Apparently "Global Warming" or "Climate Change" made my list of the top 3 things that people will cheerfully strangle each other over! Whew!

My observation about where I live (and I've lived many other places in the world, both tropical and way up north where snow is measured in feet) and the seasons, was not to prove anything of course. One spot on the Earth does not dictate what is going on with the rest of the globe. But it does crack me up when the younger generation (under 25) in this area started yelling about how our mild winter in our area was "absolute proof" about climate change.

I just looked at the cross eyed. I mean, good lord, even the Farmer's Almanac predicted a very mild winter for the SE part of the USA when they put their latest issue out last year with their winter forecast in it. Seems they were on the money.

I saw someone post on here that they were worried about volcanos, and another person state that yes, volcanoes do put CO2 into the air (along with a multitude of other gases), but that after they errupt they stop.

What an absurd statement.

First, volcanoes can erupt for just a few days, or can last up to years and years and years. Some times for thousands of years. Take a look at Stromboli in Italy. It's been erupting for over a thousand years.

Just because one volcano stops, doesn't mean the others all do too. At any given time, there are many active volcanoes out there around the world, all dumping large amounts of green house gasses into our atmosphere.

So how much CO2 does a volcano emit? Well it varies, just as how much a car emits varies too, depending on the make, model, year, and of course upkeep on it. But we can look at that (not that it will answer anything right away):

So we're talking about millions of metric tons....from a single volcano, but also is depends on the type of eruption, type of lava coming from it, and of course how long it erupts for and stays active.

Your average car puts out about 6 tons per year of CO2 according to these guys (not sure about the accuracy, but 20 pounds of CO2 from 1 gallon of gas sounds about right, but finding hard numbers is hard).

Does this mean we are not affecting things like people say?

I'm not sure. I believe we do have an affect, yes. The question is how much of an effect.
Don't get me wrong. The people in this thread that have stated that "us puny humans can not possibly hurt the Earth!" are dolts in my opinion.
Apparently they've never heard of the term "Global Thermal Nuclear War", "CFC's" and the like.
Seriously folks. We humans, can make a BIG impact on our planet. I'm just not sure if we are making as big of an impact as many would like to think right now.

Consider this: have the climate experts (and I'm talking about the people who get paid for this, not you arm chair experts) taken into account volcanoes? If Volcanic eruptions is not a constant. It fluctuates. This means that the amount of CO2 that is dumped in the air by them, is by no means a constant thing.

A human being puts out around 2.3 pounds of CO2 per day (depending upon their activity, obviously breathing harder you put more out). But according to our government, this is not counted as added to our air because, it get's absorbed again....

How much carbon dioxide do humans contribute through breathing? The average person, through the natural process of breathing, produces approximately 2.3 pounds (1 kg) of carbon dioxide per day. The actual amount depends strongly on the person’s activity level. However, this carbon dioxide is part of a natural closed-loop cycle and does not contribute to the greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere. Natural processes of photosynthesis (in plants) and respiration (in plants and animals) maintain a balance of oxygen and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Thus, the carbon dioxide from natural process is not included in greenhouse gas inventories.

Excuise me? Wait. Just wait. We humans are dumping more CO2 into the air than nature can absorb due to our activities with fossil fuels. Okay, I can buy that....but our numbers have been increasing too. A LOT. How much CO2 in one day do all the humans on Earth put out?

Heh. I still think we have a lot to learn. I sure wish people here would be less emotional, but then again, I'm new to ATS, hehehehe

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 08:26 PM
Ah, sorry, ran out of room, but I feel I need to clarify what I was saying about Humans and Breathing.

So according to the EPA, on the average a single human puts out 2.3 pounds of CO2 each day.

World population in 1804 is thought to have hit the one billion mark for the first time.

Little bit of math, and we have 2.3 billion pounds of CO2 being added to the atmosphere every day by humans in 1804. Divide that by 2,000 and you get 1.15 million tons. Per day.

Now jump up to now, 2012, we are almost at the 7 billion mark. That's 7,000 million. That's a LOT of breaths. Do the math again:
2.3 pounds of CO2 per day, times 7 billion, and you get 14.6 billion pounds per day, or 7.3 million tons. per day.

So we are now putting 7 times more CO2 in the air from our breathing alone. And the EPA says this CO2 is not factored in? That is's naturally absorbed by plants? (hey, that's from their web site).
Uhm......and exactly how many rain forests have we mowed down?

Okay, I'm not saying that our BREATHING is causing "Global Warming", but I'm just pointing out that I think we still have a lot to learn, and a lot to figure out. NO system (be it ecological, geological, or climate) is simple can can be explained away in so easily. We all have a lot to learn (for all I know, not only is the Human factor in Global Warming true, but it could be worse! I'm just saying, I don't think we really know). And yelling at each other isn't going to:

Figure it out.
Fix it if it's broke.
Find ways to reduce our foot prints

So everyone, come on. Calm down (or try to), take deep breaths. Get some coffee, tea or a beer. Light up a smoke (oh wait....okay, maybe my smoking has been hurting the climate....darn it! I just can't do anything without hurting ol' mother Earth here), and try to work together. Instead of beating each other over the head with graphs, videos, links, and insults.

At least for the next 2 posts anyways (as I think that's as long as a truce here would last! hahahaha).

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 08:28 PM
reply to post by TrueAmerican

Am I the only one that believes that MAYBE the tools they were using to mesure temperature 100 years ago may not have been as precise as those we use today?

Food for thoughts.

Peace out.

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 08:32 PM
yet another lie perpetrated by the illuminati/ Khazar agenda to make you scared and stressed so you commit suicide or worse, live in a state of perpetual mind slavery. now you have to fear the sky, and the air you breath. typical Khazar lies.

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 08:33 PM
reply to post by chrismir

The earth itself, absolutely not. Our food and living conditions, yes. Even if we kill ourselves off, the planet will be just freakin fine.

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 08:38 PM
reply to post by acuna

What about the science of geology? Are you saying that all the geologists out there that disagree are not believers in true science? Well it is a lot more solid ( pun intended) of a science than climate science,that is for sure! There no mistaking what's in the rocks.
edit on 30-1-2012 by sickofitall2012 because: Ipad changes my words damn it!!

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 08:39 PM
reply to post by bigwig22

Thermometer is a thermometer.
They all work the same.

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 09:30 PM
reply to post by TrueAmerican

Wanna buy a bridge?

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 09:40 PM
I also never believed in human induced “global warming” malarkey. Sure, Humanity needs to be responsible stewards of our planet but people like Al Gore create controversy just to stir things up & gain attention to fuel their over inflated ego sickened with megalomania.

The Earth experiences NATURAL cycles of heating & cooling that isn’t humanities fault. The attention seekers just manipulate “facts” & theories to suit their devious agendas.

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 09:41 PM
reply to post by TrueAmerican


Not a peer reviewed document in sight.

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 09:47 PM
reply to post by badconduct

People dont like paying taxes so they will complain about new ones. Generally I find people are concerned about the environment and what happens to this planet, however they seem to be more concerned about their wallet. I totally understand why and it is all to do with how our society has evolved. People resist change and often when change occurs people look back and say "thank goodness" or depending on the outcome "why did we bother"! We need to change the way we operate on this planet, humna induced global warming may or may not be happening, the point is we need to clean up our act! Or our children and their children will inherit nothing but trouble.

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 10:00 PM

Originally posted by TrueAmerican

Well I for one feel glad that I never bought into the Global Warming hoax

How is/was it a hoax? Lets look at the source you provided....

It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.

Hmmm so this confirms that there WAS a raising trend. That means that the earth WAS warming. But seems to have stalled sense 1997. So, there was/is no "hoax".

Also lets consider this...

Just because the global mean surface temp has leveled off for the past 14 years doesn't mean the the average trend is doing the same. Please look at the graphs in this link below and you will see that while there are periods spanning many years that temperatures have even actually gone DOWN, the over all trend is that the temp is rising.

I mean you could in essence judge by the recent SHORT-TERM data(your source) and conclude this LONG-TERM trend is over (and you might be right) but that would be irresponsible, because you would be ignoring the rest of the data that has been collected for over 100 years heretofore.

Look at the graphs in the links I provided. You can see that the fact raised by your OP and the data provided is nothing new and indeed there has been many short cooling periods throughout the history of our collection of data.

Take for instance a stock that is shooting to the sky for decades. It will have some dips in the graphical charting of the monitor of its behavior yet the overall trend is up up up.



posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 10:12 PM

Originally posted by JiggyPotamus
OMG people. Just because it is a hot year does not mean it has anything whatsoever to do with global warming. The temperatures fluctuate every year, and this is normal. What the OP is saying is that the OVERALL trend toward warming, which you could I suppose think of as a type of average value, ended in 1997.

That doesn't mean that it has to be cold now, or must be hot. There are still other factors that come into play when determining temperatures that have nothing to do with the ozone layer and the greenhouse effect. Hopefully, and I know this is asking for a lot, but hopefully we can convince some of the skeptics that I know exist on the forum.

I agree.....people take a year or two and claim it to be a trend on both sides of this debate. Weather cycles operate on far longer cycles and within those cycles, many other shorter term weather effecting cycles happen that sometimes work together to push weather to one extreme or another,. Sometimes these shorter cycles work against each other to cancel out one another.

Obviously, I think both sides should be able to accept that long range weather predictions are about as much of a crap shoot as GroundHog Day is....... and about as accurate. Weather changes, that's the only constant.

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 10:12 PM
reply to post by Alien Abduct

What's more reliable, layers and layers of earth evidence, or 100 years of so called data that has no real solid validity?
I'll go with millions of years of climate data in the rocks.

posted on Jan, 30 2012 @ 10:13 PM
reply to post by badconduct

What you don't seem to understand is that Carbon Credits is in fact a money making scheme and has nothing to do with taxes. The governments involvement is the regulation to make the money making scheme possible.

It's absurd to conclude that the tiny amount of CO2 we contribute overall is ample excuse to drive the costs of food up so high that people literally starve to death so that somebody like Gore can make and estimated two billion dollars overnight.

You must have never been poor and known what it is like to have to do without food and have the price of heat and gas take so much of your income it hurts you badly.

The evidence is overwhelming, even in the pirated emails from those who skewed the facts to fit the theory that this is a money making scheme to benefit a few people in power personally.

Academics and silver spoons simply don't care. Who cares if the cost of food goes up so high that Third World Countries see starvation caused entirely to enrich the elite?

new topics

top topics

<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in