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.
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
link
It’s time for us to start talking about “climate change” instead of global warming and “conservation” instead of preservation.
“Climate change” is less frightening than “global warming”. As one focus group participant noted, climate change “sounds like you’re going from Pittsburgh to Fort Lauderdale.” While global warming has catastrophic connotations attached to it, climate change suggests a more controllable and less emotional challenge.
originally posted by: Ultralight
a reply to: Grimpachi
But that was before the numerous snow storms hit the eastern US states repeatedly. Hard to claim "warming" when snow has covered your 3 story home...3 times in 3 months!
The basic thing from all of this is there is no money to made from climate change deniers.
originally posted by: here4this
See , thats what is driving this whole thing. Evidence can be posted for , and then someone will deny it and post something else.I go deeper on this subject than numbers or what someone "says". Numbers can be altered , people lie to get what they want. I want to know how "carbon tax credits" going to a company backed by politicians and ex-politicians (you know who I am talking about) is going to save the world ? Even our current President is a mega stock holder.Billions in cash to them ? From the lower and middle class families of the world . Now , who stands to gain all these billions? It isnt the GW Deniers' club. Does anyone stop and think about that ? If you had invested millions in an "investment" and stood to gain billions worldwide from it , would you continue to press the idea no matter what ? Yes. Didn't Al Gore state that the Ice Caps would be melted by last year ? The GW crowd is getting desperate as the data fails them. All they see is all that money going away.And as far as that goes , if I though for an instant (and I dont) they would actually utilize that money to improve the world in some way I would not be against it . But they wont . Not one penny. This is just their greed showing its face in one more way . The old saying goes (and it is an absolute must in this case) "Follow the money"
"Nuff Said"
originally posted by: Acatalepsia
There is no global warming. It's also quite difficult to convince someone who lives up north who experiences record breaking lows that seem to break records each year that passes accompanied by long-term severe cold weather.
Also, I guess the massive snow storms on the east coast are most definitely signs of global warming.
originally posted by: Greven
originally posted by: here4this
See , thats what is driving this whole thing. Evidence can be posted for , and then someone will deny it and post something else.I go deeper on this subject than numbers or what someone "says". Numbers can be altered , people lie to get what they want. I want to know how "carbon tax credits" going to a company backed by politicians and ex-politicians (you know who I am talking about) is going to save the world ? Even our current President is a mega stock holder.Billions in cash to them ? From the lower and middle class families of the world . Now , who stands to gain all these billions? It isnt the GW Deniers' club. Does anyone stop and think about that ? If you had invested millions in an "investment" and stood to gain billions worldwide from it , would you continue to press the idea no matter what ? Yes. Didn't Al Gore state that the Ice Caps would be melted by last year ? The GW crowd is getting desperate as the data fails them. All they see is all that money going away.And as far as that goes , if I though for an instant (and I dont) they would actually utilize that money to improve the world in some way I would not be against it . But they wont . Not one penny. This is just their greed showing its face in one more way . The old saying goes (and it is an absolute must in this case) "Follow the money"
"Nuff Said"
Yes, that "someone" is Dr. Roy Spencer, noted AGW skeptic and one of the people running UAH (University of Alabama - Huntsville)'s satellite. Even he - someone who has little motive to NOT embrace the cooler trend shown in RSS data - says RSS is messed up and showing too much cooling.
You are conflating things. You seem to be analyzing in this manner, given that's basically the first thing you write: A) taxes are bad, leading to B) carbon taxes are bad, leading to C) carbon taxes are to combat global warming leading to D) therefore global warming is a scam for taxes. If this is the case, you are going about this entirely backwards.
Give me some hard figures - some hard numbers, right here and now, about this giant jackpot of carbon stocks or whatever it is you seem to think exists. Will you do this or will you deflect?
Al Gore did not say the ice caps would be melted last year. He cited one worst case scenario study from U.S. Navy researchers that the Arctic Ocean, specifically, might be entirely ice-free in the summer months in 2014. Thankfully, the worst-case scenario did not materialize. In the very same speech, he mentioned a study that suggested it would happen in 2029 at the earliest. In case you did not notice, this is a range - not a specific date of doom. You are quite literally repeating garbage political talking points.
The only desperation we have is that there is little time remaining to even do anything (and it may be too late already), and yet the Earth ends up doing this so that my idiotic Senator can throw a snowball on the floor of Congress:
For most of two years now, it has been cooler than average in the northeast U.S. and it is frustrating that one of the most populated areas in the most powerful country on Earth is debating reality.
I was born in '81, when (according to NASA) the mean global temperature was +0.28 °C over ~1950. It was the hottest year to date. In 1998, a very strong El Niño and a very hot year combined made the mean global temperature +0.61 °C over ~1950, which was the hottest year to date. Last year, 2014, it was +0.67 °C over ~1950, and the hottest year to date - with a weak El Niño.
originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: Subaeruginosa
Even if it is the article isn't anything close to what the OP made it out to be.
It was cheaply cherry-picked to give a false narrative.
In fact, the OP substituted his own title in place of the articles. He may be skirting the T&C.
originally posted by: Subaeruginosa
a reply to: Grimpachi
The Australian is a Newscorp paper, nothing more than propaganda for Rupert Murdochs own conservative political philosophies.
I wouldn't give anything the article claims any credibility, without at least finding a non-newscorp source.