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: 19
46
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Moshpet
 


The libertarians believe in small government. The republicans believe in a big government, just like democrats do. The only difference between D and R is where the cuts should be made in relation to the government budget and business regulation.

I totally agree with you on that!


Not that I want a tiny government at all. Its just that this one and previous one were overblown and outdated and extremely careless with spending, and war mongering, etc. A "small government" in comparison to what we have now.
edit on 27/6/13 by EarthCitizen07 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07



This is what one would expect to hear from the pope. Followed by "get on your knees and kiss my hands and kiss my cross."

DICTATORIAL, not to mention FAKE science BY DECREE.


Not to change the subject, but have you even listened to ANYTHING Pope Francis has been saying and doing?? He seems to be a genuinely humble man, even those who are anti-Catholic are saying good things about him. He is even rubbing the entrenched Vatican apparatus the wrong way by telling them to live more frugal lives and help the helpless more..

Now we can go back to bickering.............



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 02:51 PM
link   
For those of you interested in learning more about climate change and how the last 50 years have been accelerated by man made industry, please check out "Chasing Ice" - it really opened my eyes to the dramatic effects we've had on the environment. Scary stuff.




posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 03:02 PM
link   


Words coming from a divider, NOT a uniter. ...blah, blah... He's a hater who lives to divide and hate
reply to post by beezzer
 


I thought you were referring to the hyperbole and knee-jerk snarling from the OP.

The environment and energy are THE issues we face today and must come to terms with before we soil our little terrarium Earth irreparably, though I'm sick of trying to make thick people see further than the dollar stuck to their nose... it's not a right or left issue, it's a life or death issue.

True, the Earth will live without us... the universe will spin on and then probably fade into the nothingness from whence it came... but in the meantime, ruining our little world because too many people don't bother with much of anything more than feeding their greed is frustrating to those who think past their next meal.

But by all means, keep modeling your behavior on Nero and his musical hobby. Oh and this is a general statement directed towards "climate change deniers," not any one poster... unless the footwear is useable.



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 03:10 PM
link   
reply to post by johnathanr
 


So because they show glaciers melting accompanied with conjecture that means we are causing climate change? Have these glaciers in fact lasted forever? No. A survey started in 2007 to watch glaciers melt in high def proves absolutely nothing. This doc plays on emotion and grand visualizations.



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Privateinquotations
 


Well, in all fairness, the trailer doesn't really explain the whole film. If you watch the whole thing, they cite and discuss many studies and scientists that explain the situation better than I can.

I understand the anti-man-made climate change point of view, but if you think about it, it does make sense. Since the industrial revolution, we've put a lot more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere. The film does a good job explaining this. At one point they show a graph that shows all the natural ups and downs of the climate cycle. Then you see the last 50 years and the research and data show it spiking up about 800% higher than any of the cycles have EVER gone, in the history of the planet. I think there is something to it.



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 04:21 PM
link   
i]reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Sir or Madam, no where in my post did I mention religion - at all. You mentioned religion. I don't think climate change has anything to do with religion, God or the Pope. I don't know what you're talking about. But, I suspect, I don't care, either. Good day.



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Privateinquotations
 


It was satire, not sarcasm. I enjoy the idea of saving energy, who in their right mind wants to waste when they don't need to? I replace my bulbs with the cfl ones, and I ride an electric bike. Because my awareness that it saves me labor, does not equate to "If I don't do these things, ill destroy the planet with CO2." Some would believe that when taking notice to global temperature rises, and then gathering evidence to support their theory.

I think we should all be more energy efficient, but not at the expense of liberties. I think it's terrible to let an entity decide what's best for everyone by force. I'm just simply observing.



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by TownCryer
i]reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Sir or Madam, no where in my post did I mention religion - at all. You mentioned religion. I don't think climate change has anything to do with religion, God or the Pope. I don't know what you're talking about. But, I suspect, I don't care, either. Good day.


Sure I did and I explained why.

Sorry you don't care, so why post back then



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 05:22 PM
link   
Øbama may be the new way to spell Moron



2nd verse.... same as the first



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aloysius the Gaul
reply to post by neo96
 


The preponderance of science says "global warming is bad" - thank god at least some politicians take time to address the issue rather than the pseudo- and anti-science rubbish that usually gets political attention.

whatever else Obama may have done this is at least a step in one right direction!



You do understand how the earth radiates off heat? How a desert can be baked to over 120F during the day, yet drop down to below zero at night. Even planet Mercury which is the closest planet to the Sun has a daytime temperature of 650C at noon, and a midnight temperature of -200C. If heat is to accumulate, it must be stored somewhere where it is retained over time. For our planet, that would mean the oceans, but they have the awkward habit of evaporating and falling back as rain.

Both China and India are building 4 new coal-fired power stations every week!
www.thegwpf.org...

"Global demand for coal is expected to grow to 8.9 billion tons by 2016 from 7.9 billion tons this year, with the bulk of new demand — about 700 million tons — coming from China,"

Closing down power stations in the USA isn't going to stop global warming while the other two countries are rapidly growing their industrial economies through manufacturing.

Therefore, the only conclusion is that this is a policy to deindustrialize the USA, not save the planet.



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 07:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by sligtlyskeptical
It's quite obvious to anyone that is looking that we are experiencing climate change. On that count Obama calling them flat -earthers is pretty accurate. Denials of climate change have their heads in the sand.

While it is quite obvious we have climate change, it is not so obvious what is causing it. Is it man's doing or is it some unknown effect from the solar system/galaxy. I don't think that can really be determined by even the brightest scientist.


Alone? No.

But it can be determined with five decades of substantial work and thousands of experiments, empirical and theoretical studies from many bright scientists.

What is causing climate change now, and not millions of years ago, is scientifically "obvious", because the evidence says so.

In actual reality among geophysical scientists, the debate ended by 1992-1994.


Let's stop talking about the dubious science of climate change and start talking about the health of the people and the beauty of the country we live in.


The science is not dubious. There are dubious people who don't like the answer and have tons of money and power and thus they work to convince even otherwise sensible people that the evidence is dubious.



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 07:23 PM
link   
the fxxxer can do what he wants man he is the president / furher of the united states
one word from him and you and your family get dronned
.


only jocking booooo sssss



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthermantwo
gee i wonder why we dont have efficient and nearly free energy by now, could it be all the inventions get bought by corporations and smashed and buried?


Or could it be there are none?
Could it be just a fantasy? (pun intended)
A fairy tale told by people who want to believe?

I have heard these tales since the 60s. I stopped believing in them once I began to see "examples" of the inventions which were hoaxes designed to fleece the feeble-minded. Sometimes a duck is just a duck. Hard to believe that inventions are being "hidden" across the whole world without one accidently, ever, seeing the light of day.....at least one that actually works.

I should have been from Missouri...cause until someone can show me something other than fairy tales regarding this subject I will maintain my current opinion.



posted on Jun, 27 2013 @ 08:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnathanr
For those of you interested in learning more about climate change and how the last 50 years have been accelerated by man made industry, please check out "Chasing Ice" - it really opened my eyes to the dramatic effects we've had on the environment. Scary stuff.



And yet the sun, and it's inconvenient influence are not mentioned I will wager? Nor would the most inconvenient magnetosphere which is losing strength, most inconveniently, which adds to the warming, most inconveniently.

It would be most inconvenient for those in position to make billions of dollars from this to have to 'splain how much an effect the sun and magnetosphere plays...oh and also, most inconveniently we cannot blame that on man, nor have we figured out a way to profit from that.

Perhaps they could 'splain how or why it is that during the planet's most ecologically prolific eras were ones where the temperatures and CO2 levels were much higher than now. OMG...it wont be the end of the world!

Congratulations, you are buying into their panic attacks.



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by HairlessApe
 


To think the Earth's climate is hanging in the balance and my truck is going to destroy the penguins is insane. Yes the climate is changing, but the whole idea that we are the cause is only a scare by the government into moving business from coal companies elsewhere. In the 1970s the fad was mass Earth cooling.

The Earth's climate moves in cycles. It's going to happen whether we like it or not. deal with it



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by ArnoldNonymous
reply to post by HairlessApe
 


To think the Earth's climate is hanging in the balance and my truck is going to destroy the penguins is insane. Yes the climate is changing, but the whole idea that we are the cause is only a scare by the government into moving business from coal companies elsewhere. In the 1970s the fad was mass Earth cooling.

The Earth's climate moves in cycles. It's going to happen whether we like it or not. deal with it


Also in the 70s: There would be no way to feed the masses of people if the population kept rising at the rate it was...
We would have exhausted our petroleum reserves by now (no kidding!)....
There are a few more that are not coming to mind right now, but the point is it seems that every decade has it's fad eco scare. (except the 80s...the 80s were like: hmmph...I dont care)

I am not saying we should not take steps to protect our environment, but we should not go to extremes crying "end of the world" if something doesnt happen.
We should examine with skepticism those with the most to gain by green initiatives when they are also the ones promoting the doomsday scenarios.

End of the world? Back when CO2 levels and temperatures were much higher than today flora and fauna diversity were greater than ever. Hardly end of the world.... Change? sure... the only thing that doesnt change is that there will be change.

An Inconvenient Truth?: Solar activity and our magnetosphere have more effect on our climate than we ever could (barring nuclear war).



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by mbkennel

The science is not dubious. There are dubious people who don't like the answer and have tons of money and power and thus they work to convince even otherwise sensible people that the evidence is dubious.


The data was classified and dubious. The scientifc methods USED sound dubious.

We already have enviromental laws in place that are enforced very selectively. Focus on balanced enforcement.

Forget the CO2 myth. And lose the arrogance while you are it! This is why lots of folks call it a religion, because "you either believe the government or you are wrong" and that IS wrong.



posted on Jun, 28 2013 @ 03:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by mbkennel

The science is not dubious. There are dubious people who don't like the answer and have tons of money and power and thus they work to convince even otherwise sensible people that the evidence is dubious.



The science is not dubious, it is incomplete. It's like taking quotes out of context. The models used cannot explain the last 13 years of flat temps, the models do not include solar activity fluctuations nor do they include the effects of a weakening magnetosphere. Are the omissions innocent or criminal in nature?

Add to that the scandals involving altered/falsified data and Al Gore's pitiful fiction which "inconveniently" was full of misinformation and outright lies and you get a situation where people feel they cannot trust those pushing the global warming (excuse me...climate change) agenda.

Toss in the fact that those pushing this agenda from positions of authority stand to make billions from the green movement and you have a situation that is rife with suspicion and shadowy interests.

All the while these individuals who are telling us we should watch our "carbon footprint" are stomping around in their private planes and multi-car convoys and 100 room homes burning the carbons like they were going out of style. The Hollywood morons disgust me the most....they outright fail to see their own hypocrisy.

I would challenge anyone who swallows the climate change agenda in totality to dispute anything I have posted here...I would love to engage and debate this subject.

For clarity purposes I believe we should have common sense controls in place to prevent the destruction of our environment from pollution, however the idea of things like carbon credits disgusts me. The idea that the main proponents of moves that would gut what is left of our economy while they make billions totally dismays me.

The green movement has become like a religion in that if you do not subscribe to it, you are eevill. Perhaps you are cast in the light of a "flat earther"....ie total moron. I am not persuaded by such grammar school tactics.

Either persuade me through logic and science or STFU.



posted on Jun, 29 2013 @ 05:30 AM
link   
Note: I only read the first 5 pages of this thread, but as far as I saw this was not mentioned.

To those who say mankind can not affect the climate, I ask you to consider this. I think many people greatly underestimate how much co2 we actually produce. Here is a link I am not sure how reliable but it has the figures and makes some important points about our co2 out put compared to that of volcanos.
Link


According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the world’s volcanoes, both on land and undersea, generate about 200 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) annually, while our automotive and industrial activities cause some 24 billion tons of CO2 emissions every year worldwide.

We produce 120x the co2 volcanoes produce. That is a ridiculously huge amount.

I unfortunately don't have time to look up the links, but increased co2 in the atmosphere, will eventually become toxic to humans and animals, it increases the acidity of the oceans, and is speculated to contributor to increasing temperatures of the globe. All of these things effect almost all organism on earth and will affect the weather. Co2 levels increasing in the ocean are speculated to super charge thunderstorms and hurricanes.

The massive flooding in Canada recently was attributed to changing wind patterns combined with other factors, which my family had commented on just before the flooding. My parents farmed all their life, they are in their 50s, and so did our neighbor and most of our relatives (spread out across multiple provinces, so the collective commenting of my relatives is not local to one area but covers almost all of Canada). Farming in Canada relies heavily on watching the weather as our growing season here is pretty short, you seed, spray or harvest at the wrong time and you go bust for the year. They have all commented that in their entire life the weather over the last 3-4 years has been noticeably messed up. Hear in BC the wind directions that are normally east-west are for some reason switching north-south, my mother and my neighbor just before the flooding both said, "this is messed up this has never happened before". This was also commented on in speculation from a few scientists on the news. As the wind change attributed to the flooding, but they don't know why the wind changed.

3 years ago I came across a military map of the future sea levels of the world calculated by projecting the current seal level raising rate accounting for the estimated increasing temperatures of the globe, a really detailed one, unfortunately I don't have the link (I find find the good one anymore from the military). You can search the terms up and find similar maps, I suggest people take a look at it and see how much the landscape can change and to look at where all the major population centers are. Man made or not, if the trends of sea level raising and increased temperatures continue, we are not in for a good time.

Last school year, I did my first year of engineering. We had a class where active professional engineers from different disciplines would give us a presentation on what they do. One engineer runs his own company doing R&D on solar panels. He had a really interesting point that most people don't know. The main problem with making solar panels viable in Canada is because its colder here and the problem is that solar panels become more efficient when they are cold. You might ask how can solar panels being more efficient be a problem? Well, as it turns out, the power spike caused by this efficiency increase due to the seasonal temperature changes causes damage to the system that transfers the power into the electrical grid. But, if this problem is fixed they become cost effective to use in Canada if they are set up properly. So, from what I understand we are pretty close to having viable solar power, if R&D continues at its current rate, in a few years.

One of my teachers specialized over his years in engineering and physics. He worked on nuclear type projects and also personally tested the cold fusion claims by Fleischmann–Pons, concluding it did not work. He is not only the smartest person I have ever met, but he also had interesting things to say on solar panels in comparison to nuclear reactors. He said that if you took a 95% efficient solar panel over a 1 km by 1 km section in the Nevada desert, it would equal the output of the average nuclear reactor. He also said, people should stop using nuclear energy because it will never be truly clean and never truly safe to use.

The reality is we need to switch to solar, be it global warming or not (which is still a very serious issue in and of its self), we will run out of coal and oil eventually, we will need a replacement energy source, why not start switching over now, and slowing phase it in? It will produce jobs and it will eventually work, we are not that far off.
edit on 29-6-2013 by halfmask because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
46
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join