The Global Meltdown of FEAR: Eliminated by 60+ visual aids.

When I first found ATS I didn't really know what I was looking for, maybe something other than the BS I was hearing on the regular news.

This site is the best I have found so far, Threads like this one are just amazing, better than anything corporate media can put out by far. like one person replied, "This thread should find it's way out to the public".

My Thanks to the OP and ATS for this great stuff to be possible.

I dont usually give stars and flags, but man...you got it. Now THIS is what ATS is all about. Ron Paul is the $hi+ . I have never felt so patriotic while being admonished as an American. Altough he wasn't admonishing Americans 9the people) he was admonishing the administration of America. He was right. The funny thing is, even when Ron Paul is outnumbered by tyranical, evil scum like Rudy Giulliani and that news guy (who cares what his name is).......he still whips their butts. Why? Because you don't have to "think" of cover-up answers when you are speaking the truth. It just flows freely from your heart. Rudy and all of the others (look back through their videographies) they contradict themselves all the time. Ron is tha man, and I believe he is on a mission from GOD. The real GOD.....not Bushs and Rudy G's and Cheney and McCains god.

[edit on 9-8-2010 by Phenomium]

I've overweight and a tobacco user, you just made me fear for my life

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
reply to post by NoHierarchy

 

Hmm...

Linking to Greeenpeace -a group that stands to gain income the more people are scared- is like linking to Halliburtan for he final word on war ethics.

Perhaps you might start over by addressing my actual talking points instead of using a blanket response.

How about you actually look at those links and deny the evidence therein. You cannot, so you make up conspiracy theories about how Greenpeace is involved in a massive conspiracy to steal your rights... when in REALITY Greenpeace and the people who compose/support it are probably the MOST aware/supportive of civil liberties of most groups out there.

My blanket response does address what I wanted to address... you're trying to equate global warming with the war on terror and therefore as some hoax/conspiracy, but it isn't, period.

But here, I'll address you anyway...

Your initial point is that the media uses fear (and sensationalism) to sell stories and get ratings. I agree with this.

Your second point is that the government uses fear, propaganda, and public manipulation, whether for real or manufactured reasons to support their agendas (esp. of war). I agree with this as well.

Your third point is that the BP spill and doomsday forecasts were overblown which is true I'm sure in some cases. However, there was a LOT of speculation over the effects of the spill and many scientists/journalists were SHUT OUT from information/interaction with the spill. Some speculation was wild, some was too tame, but ultimately a lot COULD HAVE gone wrong and still CAN go wrong with the spill. Now you're hearing that the spill is all over and plugged and the oil is all but disappeared... but that's untrue. Oil is still there, it's having an effect, it will continue to, and it's already finding its way into the food chain. The consequences are yet to be seen and to pretend like you know that it's all gonna be alright is based out of ignorance. In the age of global warming, also, methane is NOT a godsend, not to mention the incredible amount of toxic dispersant dumped into the Gulf (which will have its own consequences). Ultimately the full scope of the spill has yet to be seen/studied. The jury is still out on this one.

Your next point, about the War on Terror and the REALITY of the death rates/odds as well as military spending is great. I agree with that as well.

Then you move onto Global Warming... and I have to say, I've heard these arguments before and they all seem very convincing to the uneducated eye... however, the majority of your assertions on AGW are bunk and have been debunked. I say this not to offend you but to clear up confusion and ignorance surrounding the issue. Personally I've seen to research BOTH sides of this "debate" and have found that nearly ALL the denialist arguments are wrong and that global warming is overwhelmingly man-made and poses serious environmental risks. We're already feeling the results of global warming. I will need some time to address you point by point and break them down... for now accept this blanket statement because it is the truth.

NoHierarchy, I'm very interested in your theories on global warming, because I don't believe it's manmade. However, I do believe that man has contributed to the problem through pollution and the destruction of forests. I also think that Gore is a diversion for the real cause of global warming.

I have no links or proof of anything, but I feel the earth's core temperature has risen. The ice is melting in some areas and it's enough for native people to state they've never seen anything like it. National Geographic dedicated a magazine to smoldering volcanoes(quite a few), which does put Co2 in the atmosphere, as well as, the natives that have always obtained their livelyhood from the Alaskan waters and can't help but notice the decreasing ice caps.l

There are some areas around the US where water is lapping at people's doors and a huge hotel is in danger of being part of the shore!
There is so much contradictory information out there and I think this is the biggest coverup besides Al Gore's mission. I think the Cap and Trade is only another way of gaining more tax money from the people.

I believe I just read that this year is the hottest year on record, but there are numberous links to other articles stating that the last nine years are hottest on record. Of course NASA is going state that 1934 was the hottest year on record. There are so many links that support either side! So which is it? There's no way of knowing,unless we are receiving accurate information. Here's a link stating that the last nine years are hottest on record.www.washingtonpost.com...

Actually, I am basing my opinions on my own observations and premonitions, which count for nothing.

I think this is a very good thread with a lot of research and I think fear was originally to be used as a tool for martial law. Yes, I think it's celestial. If other planets are heating up, why not earth?

awesome post man, this is like a new rabbit hole for me to climb into, bye bye life for a couple of weeks

Thankyou for this thread,
I look forward to digesting this info in its entirety when I get the chance,

I'm not sure if this is as massive as the (unfinished) ancients series multi-thread,

but I think this takes the cake for the best thread I've ever seen here.

kudos to you

-B.M

I find it funny how you mention Islamic terrorism. If Al-Queda is funded by US alphabet agencies, then wouldn't that make islamic terrorism a farce?

I don't find either to be much of a threat. Sure, the world will change and people will be inconvenienced. However, we should be looking for ways to change the world instead of worrying about the next big "threat".

Great post S&F! Keep up the good work.

More people need to read this, and more people like you need to present facts in the way you did. ATS needs an active news channel on tv for "real news by the real people" instead of the corrupt media which Nobody trusts.

Thanks all for the kind words. It really makes it worthwhile spending all of the time, where without it's hard to have the motivation.

Originally posted by dreamwalker74
Amazing post, Though I am most interested in the nuclear waste, portion of the thread. Do nuclear powerplants put out nuclear waste? Or is it only when a site is shut down? How long does the waste remain? Just curious, for it is a topic I have not researched. Otherwise, spot on on everything else. Thank you

Thanks. And good topic.

Current methods have less than 1% of the available energy being used, initially. After some reprocessing the large illustration in that section shows they get about 5% total. The rest of the potential energy doesn't get used.

That's what becomes the "waste". Technically it's not waste in the garbage byproduct sense, instead its waste in the 'not used effectively' sense. The energy is there, just current reactors and processes aren't well enough suited to harness it.

With the right methods and equipment all of the 'waste' that's been stockpiling for the past 50 or so years becomes an abundant fuel supply.

Originally posted by dreamwalker74
reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

 

Actualy the scientific wing of "Greenpeace", encompases some of the greatest minds there are. I would trust them over most "University" studies that require the same if not more financing. The fact is that ALL scientific research groups require funding from someone. If I'm wrong, then point one out.

With universities they get a better part of their overhead from tuition. Organization such as Greenpeace are entirely from contributions (and government handouts?).

Organizations such as Greenpeace are in effect political fronts:
Gorbachev Exposes Global Communist Environmentalism Conspiracy

Originally posted by dreamwalker74
reply to post by dreamwalker74

 

That being said, Yes we need to look at the financing behind every study, period. I know you have already done a ton of reasearch for this post, and today you are my hero. Though if you were able to find out and publish, those who funded each and every one of these projects, in my eyes, you would be an ATS God. I will help if you want. U2U me.

I'm not sure which studies/projects you're referring to.

Originally posted by FutureThinker
This site is the best I have found so far, Threads like this one are just amazing, better than anything corporate media can put out by far. like one person replied, "This thread should find it's way out to the public".

Thank you! This is my favorite site too. I have every intention to get it out further. I haven't formatted it into my other avenues yet, but should tonight or tomorrow. I usually post projects like this here first, for input and quality control. ATS has the best features for discussion and debate anyhow.

reply to post by NoHierarchy


What evidence? That oil tycoons fund a "denial machine"? That doesn't prove anything, other than that they fund such.

If you read my global warming section again you might note that I specified that my presentation doesn't disprove global warming. BUT, what it proves is that nobody actually knows a whole lot of anything. To speak with absolute certainty that there is AGW is dishonest. Nobody even knows what the real global temperature record is. Even the 30 year satellite records are flawed, on top of being issued by the same government agencies involved in the AGI Manhattan Project (which is the second major prong of where it derives is funding from).

You commented on some things we agree with, but didn't touch on how AGW is the same thing for the democrats as terrorism is for the republicans. I didn't even have time to get into how it's also used for imperialism against the third world. A key to dominance in keeping others from ever catching up with you. That's exactly what's happening to poor countries who follow along wit the 'progressive' zealots who push to keep them from industrializing. This is driven by total malice: as the fact is that poverty destroys the environment. I'll further add that environmentalist rhetoric is patently anti-human: which indoctrinates people into the population control mindset that is the conscious and/or subconscious slippery slope of population extermination. That plays right into the hands of the plutocrat immortalists plundering the world economy so that only a tiny handful will be able to live indefinite lifespans via radical technology on the near horizon.

Greenpeace & civil liberties. Terrorism via fear & guilt mongering isn't what I call "peace", "freedom" or "liberty". I keep seeing one major environmentalist after another propose things like global dictatorships to stop people from releasing too much CO2. And things like we're not supposed to have brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles or cousins anymore (one child policy).
James Lovelock:

We need a more authoritative world. We've become a sort of cheeky, egalitarian world where everyone can have their say. It's all very well, but there are certain circumstances – a war is a typical example – where you can't do that. You've got to have a few people with authority who you trust who are running it. And they should be very accountable too, of course.

But it can't happen in a modern democracy. This is one of the problems. What's the alternative to democracy? There isn't one. But even the best democracies agree that when a major war approaches, democracy must be put on hold for the time being. I have a feeling that climate change may be an issue as severe as a war. It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while.
www.thegwpf.org...

climategate.tv...
climategate.tv...
climategate.tv...
www.prisonplanet.com...

In the age of global warming, also, methane is NOT a godsend, not to mention the incredible amount of toxic dispersant dumped into the Gulf (which will have its own consequences).

That methane would have been tapped out of there just the same, and it would have been burned off right at the platform, or piped up to a natural gas power plant / etc, and burned off. That would convert it into CO2, which lingers in the atmosphere longer. With over 5,000 wells in the Gulf alone, that amount of methane was trivial at best.

The Ixtoc I was also the record holder in dispersant usage. We're all still here, and were it not for the BP mess the vast majority of people would know nothing about the Ixtoc.

One of the first things I did when I started really noticing the rabid speculation being spouted as authoritative truth was look for historical examples. Ixtoc couldn't be a better example to plot this one with. If you can't go by history what can you go by?

Then you move onto Global Warming... and I have to say, I've heard these arguments before and they all seem very convincing to the uneducated eye... however, the majority of your assertions on AGW are bunk and have been debunked.

I fulfilled my share of Burden of Proof in establishing that the historical temperature record is a joke. Now it's up to others to prove that it isn't. I mainly kept it on that angle, when there's so many others I could have factored in with AGW and terrorism even. It was painful for me to keep them so narrowed but in reality that's all you really need to look at

Originally posted by AnonymousMoose
I've overweight and a tobacco user, you just made me fear for my life

It's obscene how many cigarettes I smoke, but hey that's my choice. I'm not trying to live forever, but I'll go on my terms. They go pumping nasty polymers into our smokes and they've taken the reigns.

It pisses me off several times a day. Almost every cigarette in facts. It's like a blessing when one doesn't go out. Back in December when they arrived here I looked and something like a dozen states were all going into effect over this year. I called a bunch of people telling them to buy BIC lighter stocks, since we have to light the same cigarette 3+ times instead of only once. I checked a couple months ago and that would have been a get buy. PS: get out of stocks for companies that make matches. Matches aren't even cut it to relight these damn things.

It was such a treat to be able to work that into this piece. It's like that one tiny example alone destroys the concept of the war on terror.

Originally posted by The Sword
I find it funny how you mention Islamic terrorism. If Al-Queda is funded by US alphabet agencies, then wouldn't that make islamic terrorism a farce?

I agree. I had to skip the majority of my usual talking points in this piece for it to do its job. It was painful for me but I think it was worth it. Since I'm attacking both terrorism and global warming it had to be written very carefully or basically nobody would get all the way thru it without fits of rage. I considered scaling back some of what's in it even.

You might like this:
Al Qaeda: "The CI-A Team"

I argue that the use of Al Qaeda in the 90's Balkins Wars alone proves it's all a sham.

reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss


I'm working on typing up a lengthy response to your OP on GW, point by point. So bear with me, I do have a life outside 'teh innerwebz' you know.

For now, please see my thread here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

[edit on 10-8-2010 by NoHierarchy]

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I'd also like to point out that 2012 doomongers use the same tactics, to convince us that we need to embrace for a "transformation of consciousness" that includes "hive mind telepathy". I argue this is little more than elaborate self-fulfilling prophecy that ties back into the technological revolution as portrayed in the AGI Manhattan Project...

Excellent post thank you for the time and effort.

Part of the 2012 prophecy includes "a return of the ancestors" also a move into living in 5th dimensional light bodies. This is part of the reason I enjoyed your post so much. The direction of science that you have described includes exactly that. Digital information flows - are light, remote control, splitting photon pairs - bell theorem. Leads us to experiencing through light bodies.

The 2012 date is a line in the sand, the aspects of change to be looking for, are here now, there is no need to dismiss the prophecies as self fulfilling. I find it remarkable that this time reflects so well where we have arrived to right now. With doors opening to a range of possible human futures enabled from our science and a clear need to change our interaction with the Earth - we are living in the most interesting of times.

Thanks again

reply to post by Peter Brake


If you could point me in the direction of actual Mayan prophecy texts that would be great. Last I checked none actually exist, and therefore any claims of what the Mayan calendar means are pure speculation. That being said, any assertions of the meaning spoken as absolute truth is disinfo on the part of the sources of these claims.

reply to post by NoHierarchy


Hey that's where I remember you from. It seems I have the last comment in that thread from a good while ago...

reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss


Woow man, this is award winning journalism...
You have a pdf file of this, or a video or something so this can be spread?

Tree thumbs up!!!

I am studying energy course at the moment (Energy for sustainable future).
It is clear to me that solar, wind, wave, tidal, geothermal, biomass and energy efficiency can solve all the world energy problems and export energy services to moon and mars

Nuclear is unnecessary hazardous technology - the nuclear waste is still unresolved problem. It is very costly energy and involves taking precautionary measures against terrorism.