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: 14
46
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 05:15 PM
link   
The astonishing hypocrisy of some governments is astounding, whilst advocating mass pollution, destruction, and economy wrecking (agriculture, wars, banking, privatisation, outsourcing) with one hand they are punishing the individual for petty carbon footprints and taxed to the hilt on minimal wages with the other whilst their nations are glad to have jobs and own their homes if they do. Serfdom didn't stop in the middle ages it just wears a new coat and a new name.




posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 05:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kali74
reply to post by neo96
 


I dunno ask Obama, he's a corporate worshipper too.


Not the only one as all alternative energy is made by corporations.

So the global warming crowd are 'corporate worshipper's'.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Cabin
 



I used to live in industrial area, some kind of coal plant, for some period. It sucked to be honest, the air was unbreathable.


Decidedly and factually incorrect statement...obviously, the air WAS breathable or you would not be gracing the rest of us with your post...

Nothing wrong with hyperbole...


Yet I know many people, very smart people, who actually believe it without anybody paying them for it. One of them is one of the best in the field of solar panels in the world.


If one of them is in the field of solar panels, then this explains why the belief...axe to grind and in need of outside funding from a source willing to invest in a SCIENTIFICALLY proven inefficient means of energy production...

As far as the rest of your post, it beautifully demonstrates the short sighted view that has come to dominate most peoples' view...People do live in the metropolitan areas that you despise, people do use cars, trucks, jets, trains, etc., for transportation, and you and a very small vocal minority take exception...the reality is, people need goods and services...and gasoline and diesel provide the most efficient and efficacious method of transport...



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by DaMod
reply to post by Indigo5
 


Even without the NASA quote the point still stands... The buzz word right now is "Global Cooling"..


No it isn't the buzzword. AGW induced climate change is the buzzword and it is also fact. Drastic climate changes at other times in Earth's history doesn't mean that it's not us now changing the climate, what it means is that there was a different dominant forcing (thing causing the change).



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by theabsolutetruth
The astonishing hypocrisy of some governments is astounding, whilst advocating mass pollution, destruction, and economy wrecking (agriculture, wars, banking, privatisation, outsourcing) with one hand they are punishing the individual for petty carbon footprints and taxed to the hilt on minimal wages with the other whilst their nations are glad to have jobs and own their homes if they do. Serfdom didn't stop in the middle ages it just wears a new coat and a new name.


Isn't it tho?

The nuclear testing globally, the DU rounds in wars, the bombs they have dropped, the nukes they have dropped that all have caused 'environmental' consequences we are just suppose to roll over and play dead and let them be our masters to a degree never seen before in all of human history.

I want off that ride.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 05:22 PM
link   
China Population 1.344 billion (2011)
India Population 1.241 billion (2011)
USA Population 313.9 million (2012)

the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few...

end this discussion NOW! you selfish Americans



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 05:56 PM
link   
Who gives a crap what this Obombya guy has to say ?!

The rest of the world just keeps on tickin along...

Whilst this Obombya character carries on with his blasting other countries into kingdom come pumping out mega tons of high-pollutants and leaving one helluva carbon footprint all over the damn planet... known as "bullets, bombs, scuds, drones, tankers, F22's, Cobra's, depleted uranium, collateral damage, etc etc".

So who's the one in "denial" again ?!



*yawns loudly*




(Queue Charlie Brown teacher)

Obombya: "Wah wah, blah blah wah wah wah blah blah blah."



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by yorkshirelad
 


I do not even want to quote any portions of your post, so as to not be accused of cherry picking...

All of the things you stated in your post is simply cherry picking, as there is NO consensus on ANY OF IT...except the fact I like to ride a bike...and drive a car...and have probably walked more miles than every member commenting on this thread combined...

Verifiable evidence leads to one conclusion...

As far as AGW is concerned, this is NOT the conclusion the evidence leads to...

Glaciers retreating, flora moving, etc....

You forgot one source of heat...other matter in space, perhaps bombarding the Earth with radiation...there are other sources radiation other than the Sun...

Not to mention, there have been instances in the past where the CO2 levels have been higher than now...with no humans present...at least according to science...

Do we need to be responsible, conservative inhabitants?

Yes.

Do we need to follow lame brain, hare brained idiots, declaring humanity can somehow alter climate in a beneficial fashion?

No.

I will quote this portion of your post, as I find it quite amusing...


P.S. if a person puts their head in the sand their a.se sticks out, a perfect bike rack.


I would rather be described as having my head in the sand (which I assure you, it is not) rather than clearly demonstrating a necessity for a cranial rectalotomy...



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Obama Allies Urge Environmental Activists to Avoid Economic Arguments




A talking points memo sent Monday night ahead of President Obama’s speech Tuesday on climate change tells Obama supporters to downplay economic arguments and words like “regulations.”



The memo, obtained by National Journal, includes a “do’s and don’t’s” list of phrases to use (and not use) when advocating for action on climate change. “Do discuss modernizing and retooling power plants and innovation that will create green jobs…Don’t try to suggest net job increases,” reads one part of the memo.



www.nationaljournal.com...


More from the 14-page memo’s “do’s and don’t’s” list: “Do inform audiences about the nature of the problem, who is at fault, and what can be done…Don’t debate the increase in electricity rates. Instead pivot to health & clean air message.” Another one says: “Do use ‘cutting carbon pollution from power plants’…Don’t use ‘regulations to control greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.’ ”



What a joke 'Global Warming' has become, just a means to and end, and people are willfully, and wantingly let themselves be manipulated, and used.


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



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 06:03 PM
link   
I did a full report in college on how global warming being caused by the human race is a complete farce.

To think we can make any difference on this huge planet is ridiculous. Our greenhouse gas output is less than a percent created naturally.

Hey Obama, how about you spend another 50 billion dollars on green energy and watch it all disappear!



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


That's exactly what Obama came here to do. Fundamentally transform America. He never cared about Jobs, or average middle class Americans. His job is to crush our way of life so we can become more dependent on government. He's been going against us at every turn. Now he speaks to us like were Ignorant. Obama is the Most Ignorant President we have ever had. We just have to survive 3 more years and then he can go back to wherever he came from.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


I really wanted to highlight this portion of your last post...

The memo, obtained by National Journal, includes a “do’s and don’t’s” list of phrases to use (and not use) when advocating for action on climate change. “Do discuss modernizing and retooling power plants and innovation that will create green jobs…Don’t try to suggest net job increases,” reads one part of the memo


Of course they do not want to "try" and suggest net job increases...the "shovel ready," portions have been long gone...plus, any shovel absolutely CANNOT be powered by a gasoline or diesel engine...strictly STEAM!!!

Fact is this...Obama, Clinton, Gore, Bush....all humanity HATERS...they all hate humanity...totalitarian to the core...

As long as any human is alive on this Earth, they will look for ways to kill them off...all in the pursuit of a buck...I am surprised that one of them has not yet pushed the button...



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Hey neo.

The data behind climate change is there. It's unanimous.

Read a book.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by ArnoldNonymous
I did a full report in college on how global warming being caused by the human race is a complete farce.

To think we can make any difference on this huge planet is ridiculous. Our greenhouse gas output is less than a percent created naturally.

Hey Obama, how about you spend another 50 billion dollars on green energy and watch it all disappear!


Actually about 3% of greenhouse gasses are accounted for by the functions of human societies.

Just because 3 is a little number doesn't mean it can't have an enormous impact.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 06:40 PM
link   
reply to post by HairlessApe
 


I suggest people read stuff like this:

www.forbes.com...

wattsupwiththat.com...

www.cbsnews.com...

And stuff like this:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


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



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 06:40 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.

You know the biggest problem with that is the fatal one. What happens with the occasional (and not so occasional at times) accidents during launch cycle? It had been surprisingly rare during manned NASA missions...but shockingly frequent to orbital insertion or probe missions.

What does happen to the first one that needs self destructed due to a malfunction in guidance or propulsion but is already in the 50,000+ foot range at the time? That could get messy.

I'm 100% for your solution and have thought about it a few times myself. Launching into the Sun is even better. You can't miss something that big ...and if someone actually manages? Close enough is good enough for hand grenades and solar gravity wells, eh? It's that initial launch that kills us.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by HairlessApe
reply to post by neo96
 


Hey neo.

The data behind climate change is there. It's unanimous.

Read a book.


Wrong. its 97 percent which is not unanimous. Until its 100 percent it stays a theory. And in the earlier parts of the thread there is evidence to suggest that the Global warming numbers are not accurate at all because of dirty polling and trick questions. But feel free to deny this or ignore that inconvenient truth.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by HairlessApe
 


I suggest people read stuff like this:

www.forbes.com...

wattsupwiththat.com...

www.cbsnews.com...

And stuff like this:

www.abovetopsecret.com...


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


Thanks, but I've done enough research to know it's unanimous.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by yuppa

Originally posted by HairlessApe
reply to post by neo96
 


Hey neo.

The data behind climate change is there. It's unanimous.

Read a book.


Wrong. its 97 percent which is not unanimous. Until its 100 percent it stays a theory. And in the earlier parts of the thread there is evidence to suggest that the Global warming numbers are not accurate at all because of dirty polling and trick questions. But feel free to deny this or ignore that inconvenient truth.


A scientific theory is not a colloquial theory. Don't embarrass yourself.



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 06:54 PM
link   
reply to post by HairlessApe
 





Thanks, but I've done enough research to know it's unanimous.


Apparently not.


I am seriously worried that our flagship gridded data product is produced by Delaunay triangulation - apparently linear as well. As far as I can see, this renders the station counts totally meaningless. It also means that we cannot say exactly how the gridded data is arrived at from a statistical perspective - since we're using an off-the-shelf product that isn't documented sufficiently to say that. Why this wasn't coded up in Fortran I don't know - time pressures perhaps? Was too much effort expended on homogenisation, that there wasn't enough time to write a gridding procedure? Of course, it's too late for me to fix it too. Meh.


www.cbsnews.com...

Which someone didn't bother to read or would have never said such a ridiculous comment.
edit on 26-6-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
46
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join