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.

 

Obama mocks skeptics of climate change as ‘flat-Earth society’

page: 12
46
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
reply to post by neo96
 


But if someone doesn't make a change, no one will.

I find it odd that the worlds largest capitalist society can find no profit in refitting the world with greener technology. The possibilites are mind boggling.

Imagine if the Victorians had been so apathetic, we'd all still be relying on horses and carts.


That's the thing they don't want to refit them they want them gone to create a new energy cartel.

Source in this article from my home state


Duke Energy Spokesman Lew Middleton says since 1990, Duke has spent about $2.8 billion to upgrade its Indiana facilities so they comply with EPA regulations.


indianapublicmedia.org...

Making existing energy products more costly in favor of the 'in thing'.





But if someone doesn't make a change, no one will.


Considering another issue that we all also know well would be his nuclear disarmament US gives up their the rest of the world will follow suit.

That is the same kind of thinking behind the op the reality is they won't, and other countries are currently expanding those fossil fuel energy sources to keep pace with population, and economic growth.

It's ludicrous imo as alternative can't keep up with either at the moment.
edit on 26-6-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


It's not being covered up, it's pretty common knowledge, in fact, and even NASA has published info on it. The alarmists, however, ignore it in their fear mongering.

Global Warming on Mars

Global Warming on other planets

Solar Variation

So it's not really a secret. Just an "inconvenient truth" so to speak.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 03:46 PM
link   
Since The Montreal protocol of the 1980's we have seen a reduction in ozone depletion, and this was a UN decision so imparts the importance of making "global" warming a globally cooperative effort. I like that Obama is talking about this but it won't work too well if its only the US. It's going to simply cause more pollution elsewhere, where jobs will be moved to.

Its a good start regardless. I think they need to allow the public to throw ideas out there as it will take their cooperation as well - change doesn't always have to be dramatic and can be even more powerful when people are engaged in the process. How can each person use less energy as an example instead of how can we all still be wasteful and still reduce pollution.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 03:48 PM
link   

What are scrubbers in smokestacks?

Scrubbers in smokestacks help to reduce pollution by combining calcium oxide, which is an aqueous solution, with the sulfur dioxide from the coal. This produces a slurry (semi-liquid material) of calcium sulfite which is washed down to the bottom of the scrubber where it is removed. Carbon from the coal combines with the left over oxygen to form carbon dioxide which is released into the atmosphere. As you can see, scrubbers do stop sulfur from polluting the atmosphere but do not solve all environmental problems since carbon dioxide is still released.


wiki.answers.com...

As any rational person can see its all about CO2 emissions which purportedly is considered a greenhouse gas. I guess getting rid of CO and SO2 is not good enough. Hasn't the EPA already forced companies in america to use scrubbers?

A tax on carbon is a tax on life. Whoever said it first was spot on!

And guess what apparently there are CO2 scrubbers as well but they are expensive.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 03:50 PM
link   
time for another Church... yup we have a Church of Satan, heck we even have a Church of Atheism...

so why not? what do you think they'll call it...?



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 03:53 PM
link   
Wonder how many people know that coal replaced wood as a primary energy source?

One of the first 'alternative energy sources' then came along that other miracle cure sold as the solution to all our energy needs nuclear that's been pretty much an epic failure and here comes along the next epic failure in the making 'alternative' that is all made by coal, and nuclear.

Hrmphhh.
edit on 26-6-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by SisyphusRide
time for another Church... yup we have a Church of Satan, heck we even have a Church of Atheism...

so why not? what do you think they'll call it...?


The Church of Climatology?

They have cult like status.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaMod

First they tell us that cO2 is a greenhouse gas and is causing global warming...

Enhanced 'greenhouse effect' causes global warming - Article from 2008

This was accepted science for a long long time....

Then NASA comes along and says "Wait a minute.... carbon doesn't warm the atmosphere... it cools it!".

NASA – New study shows that CO2 COOLS atmosphere


And yet you continue to cite well known, paid, oil-industry schill "scientists" as sources.

Utter BS...NASA was talking about Solar Flares.

Iceagenow???? Not relaible source, but cites..."principia-scientific.org"...have you seen that sight????

It's Chairman is Tim Ball!!
www.sourcewatch.org...

Even an AWG skeptic was forced to call BS on this claim!!...

A misinterpreted claim about a NASA press release, CO2, solar flares, and the thermosphere is making the rounds
wattsupwiththat.com...


edit on 26-6-2013 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by swanne
 


Can you show data to back up the claims that the IPCC predictions were not only wrong but opposite? Data to show sea levels are not rising? Data to show that Himalayan Glacier winter growth compensates summer melt?

Here's a cool gif to help you out. It shows IPCC predictions with observed temps.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Don't worry about it, I hear the UK is bringing a lot of money/business to South Georgia US... Or should I say Plum Creek


Renewable energy: Burning US trees in UK power stations

You see
Money, Jobs and it's renewable


It makes a lot of sense right?

Personal View: We need to invest heavily in companies that are working on CLEAN renewable energies everything else is just delaying what we need. So what if Obama lost a lot of tax payers money on renewable energy incentives, I would rather have that than someone who gives big incentives to companies who deal with non-renewable energy.

Loss of jobs and poverty is one thing, destroying the planet beyond repair is another and atm coal,oil,hemp,nuclear or even trees is all dirty. Unfortunately it's all we can work with at this moment.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 04:00 PM
link   
it is only a cycle of things which mankind is not responsible for. All anyone need do is look through history and see the record highs, lows, etc. You that believe in this whole global warming crap are being fooled. The earth is cooling, not warming.
edit on 26-6-2013 by soaringhawk because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by soaringhawk
it is only a cycle of things which mankind is not responsible for. All anyone need do is look through history and see the record highs, lows, etc. You that believe in this whole global warming crap are being fooled.


I hear ya

But it's regardless we need to show more care to the planet, going around tearing down forests and chewing up the earth. She won't be so renewable herself if we keep treating her like this.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


hey one thing I know for sure is that the climate changes all the time where I live... we have four seasons. And a rain storm just rolled through when it was hot and sunny just a few moments ago... the climate changes all the time and from season to season.

so why aren't they calling it Global Warming anymore?



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 04:05 PM
link   
only YOU can prevent bad weather !!!




posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Are you implying that solar flares and/or solar cycles cannot influence temperatures on earth to some degree?

A solar flare carries lots of energy, and energy is heat, which means localised warming and disruption of communications.

If the sun swells up don't you think that can also heat up the planets, especially those close to it?

I am not sure why you dismiss claims that fast. Maybe you have a dishonest agenda to push!



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 04:09 PM
link   
Geez, Obama's statements look vicious.
Anyway, how does one even 'fight' climate change? It's an ongoing force of nature. We the inhabitants of this planet have no choice in the end but to roll with it.

edit on 26-6-2013 by EllaMarina because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   
If we'd get onboard with firing nuclear waste into space, we'd have a pretty clean energy source that has been in use for decades....nuclear energy. The high-level waste disposal has always been the big problem, but with the privatization of space, we might see a market for it.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by RAY1990
 


I'm all for taking care of earth. We're stewards of it.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 04:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by SisyphusRide
reply to post by neo96
 


hey one thing I know for sure is that the climate changes all the time where I live... we have four seasons. And a rain storm just rolled through when it was hot and sunny just a few moments ago... the climate changes all the time and from season to season.

so why aren't they calling it Global Warming anymore?


Because it is a tried and true tactic in the world of politics called moving the line.

When one narrative gets exposed to be the con it is they switch up the argument.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
If we'd get onboard with firing nuclear waste into space, we'd have a pretty clean energy source that has been in use for decades....nuclear energy. The high-level waste disposal has always been the big problem, but with the privatization of space, we might see a market for it.


I'd rather fire politicians in to space especially those on Capitol Hill.

That would solve quite a bit of the 'worlds problems'.



new topics

top topics



 
46
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join