The March For Science

As a Trump supporter, one of the things I disagreed with was his stance on Science. I believe science plays a vital role in the direction society and humanity takes as a whole, and from what I understand, the budget has been dramatically cut for all science in general.

As we all know, today is the March for Science, and it got me really thinking, just how important is science? I acknowledge that there is and can be corruption, but I also acknowledge that there are honest scientists. So is this March another case of 'true intentions lost within the masses' or is this a real problem and does this march have a real purpose?

One of the biggest issues is climate change. I'm not too sure where I stand on this issue, I was pro-climate change for a very long time, I've seen dozens and dozens of documentaries and read countless papers and articles. Seems plausible right? But then I started to research into the possibility of it being a hoax, and the more I read and watched, the more I was unsure of the truth. I recently watched a documentary called 'Cowspiracy' and it tells a whole different story of climate change. Very eye opening and I recommend everyone who's interested in this topic to watch it.

Quick synopsis for those who can't watch; they claim climate change is real, but it's not from what you are lead to believe, and is in fact, largely caused by animal agriculture.

So it got me thinking; Trump came out and called climate change a hoax, but did he mean climate change didn't exist at all or did he mean the current funding and narrative is a complete scam and hoax? No one talks about animal agriculture being the biggest contributer to climate change and instead focus on a tiny margin of the problem. If anyone is in a position to know the ins and outs of this world and where real corruption lies, it would be Mr.Trump. I have a hard time believing Trump would come out and call climate change a hoax if he didn't have some inside knowledge of it, but could he just be talking about the current narrative? He is pro coal after all and apparently coal mining is a tiny fraction of the problem compared to animal agriculture, so does Trump know the truth?

So this leads me back to the March. Can honest scientists be led astray? Can they be manipulated as well? Surely not all scientists are in on it. Is the documentary true? Is it a hoax? What is this March really for? What is the purpose?

What do you think ATS?

Can honest scientists be led astray? Can they be manipulated as well?

Yes, and YES!

Climate change isn't about the science.

It's about political agendas.

For over 60 years green legislation existed.

A government agency for decades has been in charge of regulating the environment,

Suddenly there is the massive problem that supposedly needs dealt with.

With no solutions offered OTHER than running around like chicken littles.

The biggest problem with it all is the SCIENCE has said the Earth's climate has been in a constant state of motion for eons.

One of the biggest reasons for our EVOLUTION, and PROGRESS.

Now suddenly the social engineers have moved on to geoengineering.

The social engineers success rate is an absolute joke.

Never before in this nations history are there more people broke, and out of work, and DEPENDENT on a government stipend for their existence since our countries beginning.

Which would be expontenially exasberated by taking TOTAL CONTROL which is what geoengineering is. The total control of the land,air,water, and every single resource here.

Of course ran by that so called intellectual elite in a far away land of never never land called Capitol Shill.

What it comes down to is this.

If you believe in science, and you believe in evolution,

Let us become more than what we presently are.

Social engineering the environment to suit the mediocre is the antithesis of evolution.

a reply to: neo96

Great reply with many great points

Thanks.

originally posted by: neo96
Suddenly there is the massive problem that supposedly needs dealt with.

Nonsense, this has been a growing concern for as long as I have been around. a few decades ago the right simply rejected the sheer notion of warming, then when the south basically lost its winters, they accepted okay, but its not manmade.
you're being a bit disingenious, the scientists..global overwhelming majority of independent studies, were and are right.

With no solutions offered OTHER than running around like chicken littles.

And this is the real issue.
The solutions provided are not gonna happen. cutting back simply isn't our way. R&D is gonna be the way forward...we wont regress our civilization to minimize the impact...but we can advance and counter it.
Class 1 planet is needed. Clean up for sure, but we need to invent our way out..that is gonna be key, especially as places like China and India light up.

a reply to: SaturnFX

Nonsense, this has been a growing concern for as long as I have been around.

Civilization, in fact, grows more and more maudlin and hysterical; especially under democracy it tends to degenerate into a mere combat of crazes; the whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.

en.wikiquote.org...

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: SaturnFX

Nonsense, this has been a growing concern for as long as I have been around.

Civilization, in fact, grows more and more maudlin and hysterical; especially under democracy it tends to degenerate into a mere combat of crazes; the whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.

en.wikiquote.org...

Cool quote.
here is a picture of China

More relevant to the subject at hand.
moo

a reply to: SaturnFX

And the point is ?

We gonna go bring freedom and democracy to China and act like neocons to 'save' the planet ?

Anthropogenic climate change is a thing and has been a thing for a very long time:

The fact that politicians are slow to react is not the fault of science. It is akin to a toad in a pot over a slow burner.

The physics - yes, physics - behind it are fairly straightforward and have been known about for over a century:
1) The Stefan-Boltzmann law explains how we calculate what temperature the Earth should be at, based on: its size, its distance from the Sun, and its reflectivity.
2) The Earth is warmer at the surface than it should be, but also cooler higher in the atmosphere than it should be.
3) There are gases known as greenhouse gases, which reduce outbound infrared radiation - effectively redistributing heating closer to the surface (satellite measurements from 1970):

4) Increasing any of these gases increases the reduction on outbound infrared radiation, which means surface warming and higher atmosphere cooling.

We have evidence of both. For example, here are trends from UAH (temperature of the lower troposphere and the lower stratosphere):
TLT (near surface): +0.12 degrees Celsius trend
TLS (higher atmosphere): -0.30 degrees Celsius trend

I believe the harder to measure surface (near surface is not the same) is likely even higher than the TLT trend, because of the much stronger opposing TLS trend.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: SaturnFX

And the point is ?

We gonna go bring freedom and democracy to China and act like neocons to 'save' the planet ?

You surely didn't get that from a simple picture, did you? Sounds like you have some supressed superhero desires.

My point from my first post remains..we aren't going to change, but we can acknowledge the issue, then work on tech to counter it.
But first we gotta get through the anti-science obstructionist who simply reject the notion that mankind is screwing up the place..once we admit the problem, and the cause, then we can work on viable solutions that benefit all.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: SaturnFX

And the point is ?

We gonna go bring freedom and democracy to China and act like neocons to 'save' the planet ?

Since you don't seem to like democracy much, move to China.

originally posted by: Greven
We have evidence of both. For example, here are trends from UAH

If you would have opened with "Clinton is a reptilian demon", I think your fact based post would get a lot more stars round this part...its narrative, not informative that gets the interest.

a reply to: SaturnFX

What is your take on the current narrative? Have you seen the documentary and what do you think about animal agriculture being the biggest contributer and the conspiracy to keep it silent?

a reply to: SaturnFX

What I got from that picture is the China is a soverign country.

Which reaffirms my belief that the only thing the church of climatology has accomplished thus far is:

1. Putting people out of work.
2. Making energy costs more expensive.
3. Making goods across the board more expensive.
4. Push a technology that DEPENDS on the climate to work after saying the climate changes.
5. Outsource pollution.

Other countries are not my concern.

They are the concern of neocons.

And the only way to get everyone on board would be WAR.

And WAR is nothing more than a political argument pursued by other means.

Climate change.

100% grade a political argument.

There is already a thread on this even posted earlier.

Please post all comments in this thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Thread closed.