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.

 

Global Warming. Hotter Summers = Colder Winters. GET IT>>??

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 8 2014 @ 06:40 PM
link   
Even the political spin doesn't bode well for the conservative mindset when it comes to global warming.

People are saying that test results and papers are lop sided because of funding, or lack of funding.

Maybe if conservative groups want a better voice in this they should...ummm... fund some scientists??

-Or they just don't care to because they've made up their minds already?

You tell me there are umpteen different plant species in Borneo because you sent twenty scientists there for a month to conduct studies.

I say no way because my cousin went there for a week last year and all he saw were the same type of shrub. (?)

=How can you voice a matter of fact opinion when the group you subscribe to just doesn't give a crap??



edit on 8-1-2014 by canucks555 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 8 2014 @ 07:01 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 8 2014 @ 07:09 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 8 2014 @ 07:09 PM
link   

Cuervo

Hoosierdaddy71

Cuervo

Hoosierdaddy71
If liberals want to be taken seriously about global warming they need to put a muzzle on people like al gore.


SCIENTISTS. It's SCIENTISTS that want you to take this seriously.

When you get so wrapped up in an agenda to where even the freakin' weather is a political hot button... I don't even know what to say.




When you say (SCIENTISTS) i say refer to the post above yours. The scientists say what the funding tells them to, if not directly they present it in a way that flatters their sponsors politics.


Holy nuts, how can I even respond to that? You have a scientific method in place to conduct studies. You have TONS of peer reviewed papers supporting the claims and only a comparative hand full disputing it.

Anybody can say what you are saying! If there's something in science I don't like, I can just say it's "funding"?!



Are you seriously saying that scientists and their research papers are not influenced by money and politics?


The recently released report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which is comprised of an international group of scientists sponsored by the United Nations (UN), is extremely alarmist in nature, despite the fact that numerous top climate scientists have admitted that many of their “global warming” predictions were wrong or seriously exaggerated.

- See more at: americanfreepress.net...


Your theory of scientific research is great for math and chemistry. You can prove a math problem and repeat a chemical reaction. Now climate change is a different monster. The only way to prove their theories is to wait and see if they were right. The people that claim global warming are the same ones that thought a new ice age was starting in the 70s or were at least taught by the professors that did. These are the same experts that say hurricane season was going to be awful this year, it wasn't.
I would also like to point out that I don't deny climate change, I'm just a cynical skeptic.



posted on Jan, 8 2014 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change “Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level.”13 “Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely* due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.”14 *IPCC defines ‘very likely’ as greater than 90 percent probability of occurrence.




U.S. Global Change Research Program "The global warming of the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced increases in heat-trapping gases. Human 'fingerprints' also have been identified in many other aspects of the climate system, including changes in ocean heat content, precipitation, atmospheric moisture, and Arctic sea ice." (2009, 13 U.S. government departments and agencies)12


climate.nasa.gov...

So if 97% of scientists agree then there must be some kind of global money agenda influencing them to do bad science?

I seriously doubt that,
edit on 8-1-2014 by canucks555 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2014 @ 07:36 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jan, 8 2014 @ 07:54 PM
link   
reply to post by canucks555
 



The earth was flat by consensus until Copernicus proved that theory wrong in 1543.

Stress caused ulcers by consensus until Barry marshal proved it was bacteria causing them. He won a Nobel prize for that one in 2005.

Consensus means that the majority agree, it doesn't mean that the majority is correct.



posted on Jan, 8 2014 @ 08:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Hoosierdaddy71
 


You may be on to something. The majority think a god will save them from the man made destruction of the earth.

You are right the majority is dumb.



posted on Jan, 8 2014 @ 09:01 PM
link   

canucks555
Well this is ATS so there is nothing at all wrong with having an opinion that is in the minority.



www.wunderground.com...

see the little grey "hills" on the bottom? That's the "deniers" view. Or at least the scientists that disagree. It's too lop sided to be political people.


Wall of fricken orange and red. Opinion of the experts.

It's kinda like the Niburu threads here. Sure people post them and they have every right too, but the majority of us know that these stories of Niburu (spll) are hog wash.

In the face of such staggering stats I believe 80% of deniers do so for political reasons.
edit on 8-1-2014 by canucks555 because: (no reason given)




Even a succession of professional scientists—including famous astronomers who had made other discoveries that are confirmed and now justly celebrated—can make serious, even profound errors in pattern recognition.” ~ Carl Sagan

In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual.” ~ Galileo

Science, my boy, is made up of mistakes, but they are mistakes which it is useful to make, because they lead little by little to the truth.” ~ Jules Verne

I would remind you to notice where the claim of consensus is invoked. Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough. Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E=mc2. Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away. It would never occur to anyone to speak that way.” ~ Michael Crighton






Consensus means absolutely nothing in science, because all it takes is one scientist to come along and blow an entire lifetime of thought processes regarding a theory, right down the toilet.

Argumentum ad populum is a logical fallacy, which is why "consensus" is never a term used in any other known branch of science. This logical fallacy is ONLY used in climate science specifically regarding this AGW theory. Another words, it's a friggin joke.



Climate scientists stopped using the term "global warming" and started using the term "climate change" a number of years back.

The term "global warming" was first used because they literally thought that the planet would only warm, on an overall global scale. Now they realize that's not the case.

The original term "climate change" has always been used going back to the 19th century when referring to the planet's climate... Why ? Because it's a catch-all phrase, with the additional knowledge of knowing that the climate is never static and is always full of surprises.

So now we have AGW theorists using this age old catch-all phrase "climate change" again. Why ? Because they really don't know how this whole thing is going to play out... warming, cooling, wet, dry, globally, not globally... Thus, they're being sure to cover all of their bases.

Political rhetoric if I ever saw it.




Science is ruled by objective logical reasoning without a care of which way the experimentation and observations actually end up falling. It does NOT appeal to emotional cries of popular opinion... That's a political maneuver, NOT a scientific one.



Get it ?!

Good.



posted on Jan, 8 2014 @ 09:26 PM
link   
Sounds like the earth is getting a little bipolar. Maybe we should take her out and get her drunk.



posted on Jan, 8 2014 @ 10:49 PM
link   
The title is the funniest most contradictory title I have had the pleasure of reading. Hahah it's like saying global warming is causing global cooling, that's pretty much what the tittle says, global warming was proven fraudulent hence the reason why they changed it to climate change.
edit on 8-1-2014 by muSSang because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-1-2014 by muSSang because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 09:51 AM
link   
there is no such global warming, global warming is only in your heads and in the "paid" scientist minds. Its well know and not a conspiracy that your country did lots of experiments and wars with weather control the last few decades. There are so many references out there. There is so many universities and scientists that prove the oposite and the ice in the 2 poles is increasing instead.

This is the result of your own actions, now its time to wash out some sins, with some ice cubes.


from my personal experience, something is coming soon, much worse and non reversible. They are not able to reverse it / stop it.

so at least protect your children, get some extra foods, stay inside, get some wood stoves (whatever they call them). Because polar temps and storms are coming and leaving in no time and they are very deadly. Take the last sentence as a prediction.. lol

I wonder how is it possible some "scientist" inside sentences explaining your situation, while there is no reference in the history of human race, about that...! They should stay silenced instead. When they tell you not to panic, its the right time to panic.
edit on 9-1-2014 by Ploutonas because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 02:06 PM
link   
So every scientist is either

a. Being paid by liberals to lie

b. Not doing their job properly.

every..single..one.

Talk about close minded. I believe you're in an evil denial that will be sure to ruin the earth sooner rather than later.
Shame.

edit on 9-1-2014 by canucks555 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 02:41 PM
link   

canucks555
So every scientist is either

a. Being paid by liberals to lie

b. Not doing their job properly.

every..single..one.

Talk about close minded. I believe you're in an evil denial that will be sure to ruin the earth sooner rather than later.
Shame.

edit on 9-1-2014 by canucks555 because: (no reason given)


don't forget ...

c. making miscalculations that lead into errors.

d. have psychological and/or psychiatric issues that lead into false conclusions.

e. have a vested financial interest.

We can never be absolutely certain who we can trust with complicated analysis.



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by canucks555
 


Most scientist don't seem too concerned with Fukushima. A handfull see it as a real problem.
Most experts agree with the official 9/11 story. A handful see flaws in the reasoning.
Do you feel the same about these scientists and experts as you do about global warming scientists and experts?



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Hoosierdaddy71
 


Most scientists don't seem concerned with Fukishima??

I believe you and I may be living on different planets.
This (imo) is no argument. To say that most scientists don't seem concerned with Fukishima is a stretch at best. Actually it's just plain Not True.

Look, I realize that in this day and age it is "Trendy" to go against the MsM grain, but you people have to understand that putting your collective heads in the sand because you don't want to come off as a "Sheeple" may, in some cases be detrimental to the earth.

Certain groups can say or think what they want about 911, that's over and done with, no harm done as far as personal opinion goes. But to avoid the truth of man made global warming because you don't like a particular political party, or perceive some Rothschild global agenda is cowardly.





edit on 9-1-2014 by canucks555 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 03:55 PM
link   
reply to post by canucks555
 


So why is time magazine ,Newsweek, the New York Times, cnn, Fox News, and every network news show not headlining the pending doom of our planet every night? If an asteroid was looming six months out we would never hear the end of it.
No we get climatologists getting stuck in the ice that was not supposed to be there. IMO if most scientists thought Fukushima was going to kill us off in the very near future they would not be concerned about how much ice we will have in 100 years.
I'm not going to be to concerned about my retirement until I take care of that tumor in my chest. The tumor should probably receive more immediate attention.

And when you say concerned, do you mean concerned that Japan will be contaminated or that the planet will be decimated?
What level of concern are you thinking?



posted on Jan, 9 2014 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Hoosierdaddy71
 


There's pretty much a story everyday on all the msm sites.

My favorite Scientist, Canadian David Suzuki, has given this country his thoughts. He is well respected as he has had a weekly television show on the CBC for years. I've watched it since I was four.
He is, to say it mildly, freaking out over Fukishima.

You don't have to read Rense.com to realize the danger to the globe Fukishima represents. It's all over the MsM as well.
The only group imo that's hiding anything is Tepco.

See, even an Msmer like me knows that.


edit on 9-1-2014 by canucks555 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2014 @ 12:07 AM
link   
reply to post by canucks555
 


Oddly enough, here where I live this winter has been warmer than usual. I believe there is no set trend- warming or cooling; warming causing cooling, or cooling causing warming. I think the weather is just going crazy worldwide.



posted on Jan, 10 2014 @ 08:24 AM
link   
You can't expect much better out of a group of people who deny the world's scientists but hold up every blog by a 13 yo as proof, and then they continually bring up Al Gore as if that is an argument.

How is a 7 yo movie and movie maker, relevant??

But that is the mentality you are working with.


And they all come on here and every other GW discussion with the same arguments over and over and over, that never get updated, or more intelligent, and has the science education of a first grader.

Actually, my second grader understands more science than most GW skeptics.

Which is why the only argument they come up with is either 10 years old, or Al Gore.


GW skeptics are like religious fanatics. They have to keep themselves uneducated and refuse to read anything other than their scripture in order to keep believing in their dogma.
edit on 10-1-2014 by nixie_nox because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join